ED 244 147

TITLE

INSTITUTION

REPORT NOPUB DATENOTEAVAILABLE FROM

PUB TYPE

ERRS PRICEDESCRIPTORS

DOCUMENT.RESUME

CE 038 998

Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment,Education, and the Workplace.Congress of the U.S., Washington, D.C. Office ofTechnology Assessment.OTA-CIT-235Apr 84483p.Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government PrintingOffice, Washington, DC 20402.Reports - Descriptive (141)

MF02/PC20 Plus Postage.*Automation; *Computer Oriented Programs; Computers;*Educational Needt; Employment Opportunities; FederalGovernment; Foreign Countries; *Futures (of Society);Industrial Education; Job Development;*Manufacturing; Postsecondary Education; PublicPolicy; Research and Development; Robotics; SecondaryEducation; *Work Environment

IDENTIFIERS Computer ASsisted Design; Computer AssistedManagement; *Computer Assisted Manufacturing

ABSTRACTThiS report describes the technologies of

programmable automation (PA) in manufacturing, their uses, and futurecapabilities. Following the summary and introduction, the prospectsfor PA are examined from several perspectives. Chapter 3 defines PAtechnologies, describes their developmental trends, and evaluates thepotential for the integration of PA equipment into highly-automatedsystems. Chapter 4 examines the prospects for employment change,including the ways in which PA may influence job design and'thenumber and mix of jobs among firms and industries. Chapter 5describes effects on the manufacturing work environment arising fromthe use of PA and discusses ways in which workers are likely to beaffected--physically and psychologically. Chapter 6 ilIuminatosemerging needs for education, training, and retraining and discutsescurrent efforts to meet those needs. Chapter 7 discusses thestructure and competitive conduct of industries supplying PA goodsand services. Chapter 8 describes the roles of public and privateinstitutions conducting PA research and development. Chapter 9enumerates effects of governments in other countries to stimulate theproduction and use of PA. Chapter 10 provides alternatives forCongressional action. Summaries of five case studies and an index are

appended. (YLB)

***********************************************************************Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made

from the original document.**************************************'********************************

Office of Technology Assessment

Congressional Board of the 98th Congress

MORRIS K. UDALL, Arizona; Chairman

TED STEVENS; Alaska; Vice Chairman

Senate

ORRIN G. HATCHUtah

CHARLES McC. MATHIAS, JR.Maryland

EDWARD M. KENNEDYMassachusetts

ERNEST F. HOLLINGSSouth Carolina

CLAIBORNE PELLRhode Island

CHARLES N. KIMBALL, ChairmanMidwest Research Institute

EARL BEISTLINEUniversity Of Alaska

CHARLES A. BOWSHERGeneral Accounting OffiCe

_ CLAIRE T. DEDRICKCalifornia Land Commission

House

GEORGE E. BROWN, JR.California

JOHN D. DINGELLMichigan

LARRY WINN, JR.Kansas

CLARENCE E. MILLEROhio

COOPEREVANSIowa

JOHN H. GIBBONS(Nonvoting)

Advisory Council

JAMES C. FLETCHERUniverSity of Pittsburgh

S. DAVID FREEMANTennessee Valley Authority

GILBERT GUDECongressional Research Service

CARL N. HODGESUniversity of Ariibna

Director

JOHN H. GIBBONS

RACHEL MCCULLOCHUniversity of Wisconsin

WILLIAM J. PERRYHambrecht & Quist

DAVID S. POTTERGeneral Motors Corp.

LEWIS THOMASMemorial Sloan-Kettering

auxer Center

The Technology Assessment Board approves the release cf this report. The views expressed in this report are notnecessarily those of the Board, OTA Advisory Council, or of individual members thereof.

3

COMPUTERIZED MANUFACTURING AUTOMATION

EMPLOYMENT, EDUCATION, AND THE WORKPLACE

OTA Reports are the principal documentation of formal assessment projects.These projects are approved in advance by the Technology Assessment Board.At the conclusion of a project, the Board has the opportunity to review thereport, but its release does not necessarily imply endorsement of the resultsby the Board or its individual members.

CONURE55 Of 704 umoTED STATES

0/Ac of Technology A sssss men,

OTA- C a35". APRIL 198"i

Recommended Citation:Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Work-

place (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, OTA-

CIT-235, April 1984).

Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 84-601053

For sale by the Superintendent of DocumentsU.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402

Foreword

This assessment culminates OTA 's examination of the technical, economic,and social issues Surrounding the spread of programmable automation in rnanufac;turing. Its genesis was a public workshop in 1981 on robotics that resulted inthe OTA Background Paper entitled Exploratory Workshop on the Social Impcations of R_ oboticS (February 1982). The assessment was requested by the JointEconomic Committee, the Senate Committee on Labor and Human Resources,the Senate Committee on Commerce; _Science; and Transportation, and the Sub=committee on Labor Standards of the House Committee on Education and Labor.It was endorsed by the FibuSe COmmittee on Science and Technology. The assess-ment looks not only at PA-a§ but also at related computer-based technologiesfor design, production, and management.

The technolegies of programmable automation, their uses, and future capabili-ties are described_ in this report. The assessment goes beyond technology descrip-tion to characterize the industries producing and using pi ogranitnable automa-tion and to discuss the ramifications of the technologies for industrial structureand competitive conduct. It pays special attention to three labor-related areas:the potential fOr employment changeeffects on the work environment, and im-plications for education and training. Preliminary work in those areas, includingconceptual diScuSsibriS and background material; was published in the OTA Tech-nical_ Memorandum entitled Automation and -the Workplace: Selected Labor,Education, and Training Issues (Maith 1983). SinCe the development and sale ofprogrammable automation have been international phenomena since at leasl the1960's; comparisons between this Country and Others are made as far as data allow.

A wide range of sources contributed to this assessment. While OTA drew onexisting literature and COnferences, it also developed its own information throughworkshops on labor markets, programmable automation technologies; and pro-grammable automation (producer) industries; and through informal site visits andconsultations. Eighteen case studies, including 4 on the work environment and14 on education and training prOgrains, and a survey of education and trainingactivities commissioned for this assessment were particularly rich sources of data;Case study material will be made available in a companion volume.

OTA is grateful for the assistance of the assessment advisory panel, workshopparticipa.ntS, contractors, and many others who provided advice, information, andreviews. The cooperation Of individuals at case study sites; who accommodatedlengthy site visits and follow -upNconsultations, is especially appreciated. OTAassumes full responsibility few this assessment, which does not necessarily repre-sent the views of individual members of the advisory panel.

JOHN H. GIBBONSDirector

iii

Computerized Manufacturing Automation Advisory Panel

RoyPresident,

Amara; ChainntinInatitute for the Future

M. Granger MorganProfessor, Engineering and Public PolicyCarnegie=Mellon University

George J. PoulinGeneral Vice PresidentInternational Association of Machinists and

Aerospace Workera

Bernard M. .SallotPresidentAdVanced Technologies Groun Services

Harley ShaikenRilearth FellowMassachusetts Institute of Techology

KeViii G. Snell _Director; Forward Planning and Program_ DevelopmentCareer Works;:iiic

Alfred P. TaylorVied President (retired)General Electrie Co.

Philippe VillersPresidentAutethatix, Inc.

Victor C. Walling, Jr.Coordinator; Business Futures ProgramSRI International

Dennis WisnoskyVice PresidentGCA Corp.

Michael WoznyDirector, Center for Interactive Computer

GraphicsRensselaer Polytechnic Institute

Robert ZagerVice President, Policy Studies and Technical

ASSiStanceWork in America Institute

William D. BeebyPresidentWilliam Beeby & Associates; Inc.

Erich BloehVice President, Technical PerSonnel

DevelopmentIBM Corp.

Barbara A. BurnsManufacturing Technology Group EngineerLockheed Georgia

Jack CallenManager, Training and DeVelopmentCincinnati Milacron, Inc.

Dennis ChamotAssistant DirectorDepartment Of Professional EmployeesAFL=CI0

Robert ColeDireetor, Center for Japanese StudiesUniversity of Michigan

Alan E. DraneManager_of Autothated SystemsEmhart Corp.

Audrey FreedinatiSenier Research_AssociateThe Conference Board, Inc.

Sheldon FriedmanDirector; Research DepartmentUnited Ante Workers

Theodore W. Kheel, Esq.of CeutiSelBattle, Fowler; Jaffin & Kheel

James F. LardnerVice President, GOVernmental Products and_ Component SalesDeere & Co.

Eli LustgartenVice PresidentPaine Webber Mitchell Hutchins; Inc.

NOTE; OTA appreciates and is gratehA for the valuable assistance and thoughtful critiques provided by these advisory panel

members. The views expressed in this OTA Report, however, are the sole responsibility of the Office of Tethnology Assessment.

iv7

OTA Manufacturing Automation Assessment Staff

John Andelin, Assistant Director, OTAScience, Information, and Natural Resources Division

Frederick W. Weingarten, Communications and Information Technologies Program Manager

Project StaffMarjory S. Blumenthal, Project Director*

Beth A. Brown, Senior AnalystJean E. Smith, Analyst

Jim Dray, Research AssistantBeth Glassner, Research Analyst

Administrative StaffLiz Emanuel Marsha Williams Shirley Gayheart

Contractors and ConsultantsEileen Appelbaum

N. Jeanne ArgoffIndustry and Trade Strategies

Massachusetts Institute of Technology: Harley Shaiken, Sarah Kuhn, and Steve HerzenbergWESTAT

Court land S. Lewis (editor)

'Zalman A. Shavell served as Project Director from April to August 1982.

Automation Technology Workshop

David GrossmanManager of Automation Research _IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center

Robert HockenChief, Automated Production Technology

DivisionNational Bureau of Standards

Stuart G. MillerManager, Automation and Control LaboratoryCorporate Research and DevelopmentGeneral Electrib Co.

Brian MoriartyFMS SpecialistCharles Stark Draper Laboratories

Richard MuellerSenior Consultant, CAD/CAMControl Data Corp.

Michael RadekeVice President, RoboticsCincinnati Milacron, Inc.

Automation Industries Workshop

Kenneth AndersonPublisherAnderson Reports

Laura ConigliaroVice Pre SidentPrudential-Bache Securities, Inc.

Joseph FranklinStatiatical DirectorNational Machine Tool Buildera ASSOciation

Eli LustgartenVice PresidentPaine Webber Mitchell Hutchina, Inc.

vi

P ernard RothDesign Division, Mechanical Engineering_ DepartmentStanford University

Ali SeiregDepartment of Mechanical EngineeringUniversity of Wisconsin-Madison

Richard SimonDirector, Product ManagementCAM SystemsComputervision Corp.

Theodore J. WilliamsDirector, Laboratory for Applied Industrial

ControlPurdue University

Carl MachoverPresidentMachover Associates Corp.

Bernard M. SallotPresidentAdvance Technologies Group Services

Dennis WisnoslcyVice PresidentGCA Corp:

Labor Markets and Industrial Relations Workshop

Eileen AppelbauniDepartment of EconomicsTemple University

SteVeh Ciiiifoi-ConsultantCommunications Workers of America

William CookeKrannert School of ManagementPurdue University

Faye DuchinInstitute for Economic AnalysisNew York University

Alan FechterExecutive DirectorOffice of Scientific and Engineering PersonnelNational Research Council

Sheldon FriedmanDirector, Research DepartmentUnited Auto Workers

Reviewers and Other Contributors

Roger S. Albrandt, Jr.Associate Director and ProfessorSchool of Social WorkUniversity of Pittsburgh

Robert Ayres _Professor, Engineering and Public PolicyCarnegie-Mellon University

Robert W. BednarzikDepartment of LaborBureau of International Labor Affairs

J. Terence CarletonAnalyst -Kidder, Peabody & Co., Inc.

Eileen CollinsOffice of Policy; Research, am! AnalysisNational Science Foundation

Robert CraigVice PresidentAmerican Society for Training and Development

Frank CurtinGeneral Manager, Factory Automation SystemsGeneral Electric Co:

Edward CzarneckiAssociate DirectorAFL-CIO Education Department

Louis JacobsonCenter for Naval Analyses

Michael PilotManager, Office of Occupational OutlookBureau of Labor Statistics

Markley RobertsEconomistAFL-CIO

Myron RoomkinKellogg School of ManagementNorthwestern University

Jim SmithLabor and Population ProgramRand Corp.

Kenneth R: EdwardsDirectorSkill Improvement Training Department_International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers

Joel FademSenior FellowCenter for Quality of Working LifeUniversity of California, Los Angeles

James FleckLecturer _

TechnolOgy Policy thatUniversity of Aston (U.K.)

Barry HairnesAnalystKidder, Peabody & Co., Inc.

David HardtDepartn-ent of Mechanical EngineeringMassachusetts Institute of Technology

Eric HendrixInternational Affairs AnalystCentral Intelligence Agency

Daniel M. HullPresidentCenter for Occupational Research and

Development

.1 uVII

H. Allan HuntManager_for ResearchThe W. E. Inatit Ute for Employment

Research

Timothy I.,. HuntLabor EconomistThe W. E. Upjohn Institute for Employinent

Research

G. Patrick JohnsonDivision of Policy_ Research and AnalyaiSNational Science Foundation

Ronald LarsenComputer Science and Electronics OfficeNational Aeronautics and Space Administration

Lloyd LehnAssistant for Manufacturing TechnologyDepartment of Defense

M. Eugene MerchantDirector; Advanced Manufacturing ResearchMetcut Associates

Steven MillerGraduate School of Industrial AdministrationCarnegie-Mellon University

OTA Reviewers

John AlicEric BazquesLinda GarciaMartha HarrisBarry HoltDonna ValtriFred Wood

viii

RandolPh E. RossAnalystKidder, Peabody & Co., Inc.

Robert SchrankIndependent Consultant(formerly with Ford Foundation)

Walter SchuelkeManager, Sub-systemsManufacturing EngineeringIBM;Poughkeepaie

Warren SeeringDepartment of Mechanical EngineeringMasiachUSetts Institute of Technology

Ben ShneidermanDirector, HumanComputer Interaction

LaboratoryUniversity of Maryland

George SilvestriLabor EconomistBureau of Labor Statistics

Donald VincentExecutive DirectorRobot Institute of America

Contents

Chapter Pag0L Summary 3

2. Introduction 25

3. Programmable Automation Technologies 33

4. Effects of Programmable Automation on Employment 101

5. The Effects of Programmable Automation on the Work Environment 179

6. Education, Training, and Retraining Issues 219

7. Programmable Automation Industries 269

8. Research and Development 307

9. International Support for Programmable Automation 337

10. Policy Issues and Options 367

Appendix ASelected Case Studies 401

Index 467

12 ix

Chapter 1

Summary

ContentsPage

Principal Findings 4

The TechnologieS 4

Employment Effects 5

Work Environment 8-,-

Education, Training and Retraining Issues 11

Programmable Automation Industries 12

Research and Development . 12

International Policy Comparisons 14

Imp liioations for Federal Policy 15

Policy Strategies 15

Specific Policy Options 16

Tiib lesTable

Page

1 Programmable Automation: Selected Projections forSolution of Key Problems 6

2. 1980 Employment for All Manufacturing Industries,Selected PA- Sensitive OCcupations 8

3. Federal Funding of Research and Development inProgrammable Automation, Fiscal Year 1984 13

Chapter 1

Summary

Computer technology offers new opportuni-ties to enhance and streamline manufacturingprocesses. Many industry observers believethat computerized manufacturing automationwill help troubled U.S. manufacturers_ becomemore productive and competitive; At the sametime; this new wave of automation is raisingconcerns similar to those that acCompaniedthe first wave of automation teelmOlogY in the1950's and 1960's Will the new technologiesput a significant number of peOple out ofwork? Will their introduction "dehumanize"the work environment for those who remain?And howcan the United States best prepareits education and training system to respondto the growing use of computerized manufac-turing automation?

Though manufacturing automation tech=nologies can be applied in a wide range Olin=dustries; the focus of this report is the applica=

:tion of programmable automation (PA) in diS;_ crete manufacturingthe manufacture Of dia,

crete products ranging from bolts to air-craft.Most traditional metalworking industries falliii this category, although other materials (e.g.,Plastics, fiber composites, ceramics) are in-creasingly important parts of discrete manu-facturing as well. Discrete manufacturingplants are often characterized by the quanti-\ty of a product which they produce; rangingfrom mass production of hundreds of thou-Sands of products, to batch production of a fewdozen or a few hundred, to custom productionof a single item. Because of its ability to per-fOrm a variety of tasks; programmable auto-mation is usually associated with batch pro-ductiop. However; it has been used extensivelyin mats production, and it could be useful in

.;-- custoir production as well.PA obis differ from conventional automa-

tion primarily in their use of computer andcommunications technology; They are thusable to perform information processing as wellas physical work; to be reprogramed fora vari=

ety of tasks, and to communicate directly withother computerized devices. PA is divided intothree general categories: 1) computer-aideddesign; 2) computer-aided manufacturing (e.g.,robots, computerized-machine tools, flexiblemanufacturing systems); and 3) computer-aidedtechniques for management (e.g., managementinformation systems and computer-aided plan-ning)". When used together in a system withextensive computer-based coordination, thesetools are known as computer-integrated man-ufacturing.

Three principal themes have emerged fromOTA'S Study:

1. Programmable automation is an impor-tant and powerful set of tools, but it ISnot a panacea for problems in manufac-turing. In part because of historic U.S.strengths in manufacturing, and becausethe prestige of manufacturing engineer-ing is low relative to other engineeringfields, U.S. companies have devoted rel-atively little effort to improving manufac-turing processes in the past few decades.This neglect must be remedied in order torealize the full benefits of PA. In additionto using automation; other steps thatneed consideration by management in-clude redesigning products for more effi-cient production; minimizing inventorylevels, and improving job design and laborrelations.

2. The change in national employment in-duced by programmable automation willnot be massive in the near term (i.e., theremainder of the 1980's). Although therate of application is accelerating,, aggre-gate use will still be relatively limited forthe restof this decade. Also, the capabili-ties of PA remain immature. Dependingon macroeconomic conditions, use of auto-mation can increase without significantgrowth in national unemployment. How-ever, PA will exacerbate unemployment

3

4 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, EdUcation, and the Workplace

problems for individuals and regions. Thepotential long-term impact of PA on thenumber and kind of jobs available is enor-mous, and it is essential that the FederalGovernment, educational institutions,and industry begin to plan with these con-siderations in mind.

3. The impact of programmable automationon the work environment is one of the mostsignificant, yet largely neglected issues. De-

PrincipaThe Technologies

This report emphatizes five of the PA tech-nologies. Computer -aided design (CAD) in itssimpler-forms is an electronic drawing boardfor draftsmen and design engineers. In itsmore sophisticated forms CAD is the core ofcomputer-aided engineering; allowing erigi=neers to analyze a design and maximize a pred:tict's performance using the computerized -rep=

reaentation of the product:Industrial robotS are Manipulators which

can be programed to move objects along vari-ous paths. Though robots receive a great dealof popular attention, they are only a small part

Photo orodlt: Cincinnati Milacron Corp.

An engineer using a computer.alded design system

pending on how it is designed and used,PA can substantially change the natureand organization of the manufacturingworkplace, and consequently influencelevels of job satisfaction, stress, skills,and productivity. The Federal Govern-ment has traditionally had a role in work-place concerns, and could take action tohelp ensure that the work environment ef-fects of PA are favorable.

Findingsof the family of PA tools. Numerically con-

hi devicestrolled (NC) macne tools are that cutor form a piece of metal according to pro-gramed instructions about the desired dimen-sions of a part and the steps for the process.Flexible manufacturing systems (FMSs) com-bine a set of workstations (usually NC machinetools) with robots or other devices to move ma-terial between workstations, and operateunder central computer control. Finally, theuse of PA tools for design, manufacturing, andmanagement in an integrated system, withmaximum coordination and communicationbetween them, is termed computer-integratedmanufacturing (CIM).

The advantages of PA for management lieprimarily in its ability to facilitate informationflow, coordinate factory owiations, and increaseefficiency and flexibility. Further, the technol-ogies promise an increase in management's de-gree of control over operations. The more close-ly tied manufacturing processes are to oneanother, and the more information about thoseprocesses is readily available, the less chancethere is for human error or discretion to causeproblems. However,_ this drive toward in-creased 'control can also reduce cipportunitiesfor constructive worker input and degrade thework environment.

Each of these technologies is in a relativelyearly stage of development, and even earlierstages of application. Robotics is well estab-lished only for spot welding, spray painting,

I

and some materials handling uses; NC ma=chine tools and CAD are somewhat more Ma;ture technically, althotigh there are still manyunsolved problems. FMS and CIM are veryyoung; virtually every application is a proto-type.. As systems, their potential benefits andproblems are much greater than those ofstand-alone automation_ equipment. Becauseof their complexity, the implementation of in-tegrated automation systems requires exten-sive planning and support.

Though current technology is adequate for thevast majority of near-term uses, the level ofetration of PA into possible applications is re];atively low; Technicalfaetore that tend to slowthe rate of adoPtion of PA technologies includeits complexity, the lack of standard program-ing languages and interfaces between PA de-vices; and problems in "human factors" (es-sentially, the system's eaSe of use). A widevarietyof nontechnical factors also affect theuse of PA, including the availability of capitaland know:how, organizational resistance tochange, and the availability of appropriate ed-ucation and training programs;

For various reasons, most manufacturerschoose to apply automation in a stepwise fash-ion, beginning perhaps with one or a smallnumber of robots, CAD terminals, or NC ma-chine tools. Though in many cases these"islands of automation" can result in produc-tivity and quality improvements, the full ben-efite of PA are only realized when these de-vices are connected into an integrated system.Such integrated systems are more than theaccumulated substitution of PA tools forhuman workers or for other machines; theyOften involve redesigning the product orstreamlining the production process itself tobest make use of PA. Because an integratedsystem can produce more products morequickly than other manufacturing schemes,manufacturers can reduce their investment infinished_ product- and work -in- process inven-tories. These and other Materials savings areoften more significant than labor savings in theuse of programmable automation systems;

Ch. 1Summary 5

Researchers are working to increase the ver-satility and power of PA tools, to enhancetheir capability to operate without human in-terventimi, and to develop the ability to integrate the tools. While there has been prog-ress in virtually all key technical areas, theproblems are sufficiently numerous and com-plex to keep researchers busy for many yearsto come. An analysis of expected trends in thetechnologies indicates, however, that many im- ,

portant technical advance§ in programmableautomation are expectkl in the 1990's (see table1).

Though there is much discussion of "un-manned factories," experts differ about wheth-er the removal of virtually all humans frOm themanufacturing process is necessary or desir-able. Some express concern that manufactur-ers will be preoccupied with removing humansfrom the factory floor at the expense of morepractical and cost-effective improvements inmanufacturing processes. In any case, eachfactory has peculiar characteristics which callfor different levels of automation. For somefactories it has been possible to run machinetools at night with only one person in a con-trol room. For at least the next 10 to 15 years,diScrete manufacturing factories operating with-out production workers (i.e., with only a fewmanagers, designersoind troubleshooters) willbe only a remote possibility.

Employment EffectsProgrammable automation is not likely to

generate significant net national unemploy-ment in the near term, but its use may exac-erbate regional unemployment problems, es-pecially in the East North Central and MiddleAtlantic areas where metalworking industriesare concentrated.

The level of automation in manufacturingis one of many factors that influence industrialemployment. In particular, it should be recog-nized that employment in an industry is a strongfunction of the volume of production. Technol-

6 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

Table 1.Programmable Automation: Seledted Projections for Solution of Key Problems

1) Low-cosworkstat

a) eleb) me

2) 3-0 ViSiewhich hvision to

3) 3-13 visioenvironplanned

4) FMS for:a) cylib) sc) 3-Dd) ele

5) Standardwide rangyintegrate

6) Computeon_ a daypeople it

(excerpts from tables 11-15of full report)

Current (1984) 1985-86 1987-90 1991-2000 2001 and -beyond-

powerful microcor-nuter-basedions for:actronics designchanical deSignn in structured environmentsive been planned to simplify thesk.................. A III

n in unstructured complexlents which have not beento simplify the vision taskb

ndrical parts productionet metal parts production A

mechanical assembly A

ctronics assemblyization of interfaces between

A

M

A

3e of computerized devices in and factorysized fattorieS which could runto-day basis with only a few

A

1 management, design functions .

aMicrocomputerbased workstations for OAD_are nowizein_gmarketed.hut in the judgment of technical experts consultedby OTA, they are of her not powerful enough

and(or hot inexpensive enough to be useful in a wide variety of applications.bAlmost_all FMS5 currently_running are used to machine prismatic parts (e.g., engine blocks), which,irti_these whose outer shape consists primarily of flat surfaces.

The projections in this entry refer to FMS for quite different _apPliegLOrtSL w_machining of cylindrical parts, such as rotors and driveshafts (or 'Tarts of rotation,"

In machining Jargon, since they are_generally_m_ade_an_lethesY,b)5tamping and bending of sheet metal pads, such as car body panels;-c)assembly_iasoppoShdlefahricatiOn_afindtvid_uelparts)otthree-dimensional products, such as motors; and chassembly-of eleCtronic daylcas,such at_eirtull boards. While machines currentlyexist for automatic insertion of electronic parts into circuit boards, an electronics FMS woultl Integrate the insertion devices with soldering and testing equipment.

A solution in laboratories.first _commercial_ applications._

- solution widely and easily available (requiring minimal custom engineering for each aPplicatIont.

SOURCE. OTA analysis and compilation of data from technology experts.

ogy is a secondary influence that governs themix of people; equipment; and materialaneeded to produce a given amount of product.Hence; although PA is labor-saving, the aggre-gate number of jobs in an economy =St beexamined in _the context of overall economicconditions. These conditions include short-term businesS cycles as well as long -termshifts in the strengths and structures of dif-ferent inclUStrieS, plus levels of imports andexports; Thus, the favorable effects of PA onindustrial competitiveness may help to in-crease derriiiiid for labor or help to avert joblosses that could occur in its absence.

Evaluating the employment effectS of PAposes serious analytical problems. There areshortcomings in current approaches for thisanalysis, and data available support wily infer-ences as to the general directions of likely oc-cupational and industry employment change.

Employment change will depend on a seriesof complex effects on jobs. Those effects willbe realized as changes in the tasks that peo-

ple will do, changes in the requirements forskill, and changes in the ways managers aggre-gate tasks into jobs and assign them to peo-ple trained for different occupations. The scopeof change may be neither obvious nor imme-diate, because PA wilt often be accompanied-bificant transformations of manufactur-ing organization; production processes, andiorproduct design. The more extensive suchtransformations, the broader the set of peo-ple affected by the introduction of PA, and theharder it is to attribute employment effectsto PA, per se.

_-Change in Skill requirements will often re-flect a shift from manual to mental work. Inmany cases, PA will lower the time requiredfor people to become proficient at a task, andit may lower the amount of judgment needed.At the same time, it may lead to a requirementfor general knowledge of several tasks, broad-ening the mix of skills needed. For example,it is likely that PA maintenance personnel willneed to know how to solve mechanical, elec-

18

Ch. 1Summary 7

tried, and electronic problems rather than oneclass of problems alone.

The fewer the tasks comprising a job, themore likely it is that programmable automa-tion can eliminate the need for a given job. Forexample, spot welders who only do spot weld-.ing, are more likely to be displaced by spot-welding robots than if they do other tasks aswell. HoWever, PA offers new potential forcombining diverse tasks into-jobs instead,offragmenting work into narrowly defined jobs,as has historically been associated with mech-anization. It raises the prospect of a tradeoffbetween larger- numbers of narrowly definedjobs and smaller numbers of more broadlydefined jobs.

A major influence on employment is the sup-ply of labor; which will grow more slowly dur-ing the next decade or so, in large part becauseof slower growth of the population and an in-crease in the average age. The supply ofyounger workers will decline, diminishing com-petition far entry=level jobs, while the propor-tion and number of prime-age workers (25 to54 years) will grow.

From early indications, it appears that PAwill cause the following broad,. long-termtrends in occupations:

demand for engineers and computer_scien-__lists, technicians, and mechanics, repairers,and installers on the whole will risealthough specific occupations (e.g., draft-ers) will face diminishing opportunities;demand for craftworkers (excluding me-chanics), operatives, and laborersespecial-ly the least skilled doing the most routineworkwill fall;demand for clerical personnel will fall; and

- demand for upper-level managers and tech-nical sales and service personnel will rise,although lower- and middle-managementopportunities among users of PA mayfall.

Table 2 lists 1980 levels of employment for oc-cupations most likely to experience changesin demand. Taken together, these effects sug-

25 -4S2 0 - 84 - 2 : QL 3

gest major shifts in the occupational mix ofmanufacturing industries, especially metal-working. Overall, the salaried or white-collarwork force will constitute a larger proportion ofmanufacturing employment, although it is notclear how much their ranks will grow in abso-lute terms. PA, producers especially are

to employ relatively few production person-nel; their situation may signal future patternsamong other firms and industries. Conse-quently, there will be few opportunities for peo-ple displaced from other manufacturing indus-tries to move into jobs among producers of auto-mated equipment and systems.

In Many ways, the shifts in occupations willnot be straightforward. Some skills may onlybe required temporarily, after technology hasbeen introduciA but before further automationis achieved. For example, when automatedequipment is used in isolated applications,there may be many needs for programing. But,the integration of design with process plan-ning and production systems reduces the needfor programing, as does the development ofstandard, easy-to-use software packages.These "short-term" phenomena may persistfor many years, making it hard to plan forlong-term employment change.

The effects of PA on compensation patternsare ambiguous, partly bacause numerous otherchanges are occurring in the economy. Overthe past decade, there appears to have beenan erosion of medium-wage jobs, and cluster-ing of jobs at both high- and low-wage levels.Analysts attribute this in part to the prolif-eration of low-wage service jobs, and in partto growing separation of administrative andproduction functions in manufacturing. PAwill likely stem the latter trend by helping tointegrate administrative and production activ-ities. Other developments, such as slowergrowth in the labor force participation ofwomen (who filled the bulk of the new, low-paying service jobs created in the past decade),may also serve to alter past trends.

Finally, compensation patterns will dependon the length of the average work week. When-ever it appears that there may not be enough

19

Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment; Education, and the Workplace

Table 1-1980 Employment for All Manufacturing Industries;Se !deed PASensitive Occupations

Number PercentLong-term direction

of change-

Engineers_ElectricalindustrialMachanical

Engineering and science techniciansDraftersNC tool programers__

579;677173,647

71,442122,328439,852116;423

9;371

2.850.850:350.602.160.570.05

Computer programers . 58,622 0:29

Computer systems analysts 42,404 0.21 +Adult education teachert 5,165 0.03

Managers,_officials, and proprietors 1,195;743 5.87

Clerical workers 2,297;379 11:28

Prdduction clerks 139,947 0.69

Craft and related workers 3,768,395 18.51

Electricians 126;901 0.62

Maintenance mechanics and repairers 391;524 1.92

Machinists; toot and slie makers 356,435 1:75

Inspectors and testers .538,275 2.64

Operatives 6,845,318 43.44

Assemblers 1;661;150 8.16

Metalworking operatives 1,470,169 7.22

Welders and flamecutters 400,629 1:97

Production painters 106,178 0.52

Industrial truck operators 269,105 1.32

Nonfarm laborers 1;576;576 7.74

Helpers; trades__ 100;752 0.49

StOckhandlers; order fillers 104,208 0:51

Work distributors 16,895 0.08

Conveyor operators 31,469 0.15

NOTE Data pertain to wage and salary workers.SOURCE:.Bureau of Lebor StatietIde, "EmplOyment by Industry and Occupation, 1980 and ProjeCted 1990 Alternatives, un-

Published data:

jobs, or enough well-paying jobs, to occupyjob-seekers, it is often proposed that averagework hours be reduced to allow more peopleto hold jobs. However, the average work weekcannot necessarily be reduced without lower-ing the real wages per employee.

In light of the attention given to the Japa-nese, who use PA extensively and who haveexpanded production, it is instructive to seehow their work force has been affected. Japa-nese companies have displaced labor, butdisplacement has often been masked by shift-hig relationships between manufacturera andsuppliers, and by selective layoffs that affectprimarily female; middle-aged, and older per-sonnel.

Work EnvironmentApplication of computers to the manufac-

turing workplace offers a rangeof options fororganizing work in ways that will enhance theworkplace. PA, in particular, provides the po-tential to achieve a better balance between theeconomic.considerations that determine tech-nological choices and the social consequencesof those choices in the workplace. Althoughhistorically U.S. manufacturershave tended toplace a lower priority on work environmentissues, there is a growing awareness among man-ufacturers that attention to the work environ-ment ultimately hat: payoffs in productivity.Work environment issues may become moreimportant to the public, meanwhile, as chang-

20

ing employment patterns reducenities for personnel to move outtory manufacturing jobs into of

The various forms of PA have 1and negative effects on the safetof workers. The introduction of p:automation will create new situapetuate old ones; that have negati

A "machining cell," consisting of c

Ch. 1Summary 9

is on the work force. Two of the prin-cts are boredom and stress. Boredom5s in the automated workplace can

the characteristics of the design ofaical system and work organization,s from such factors as lot size and thef the product manufactured. In sites

OTA work environment case stud-EIS evident that both FMSs and NC

M

Photo credit: Cincinnati Milacron Corp.

tools, manufactures printing press parts

2

10 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment; Education, and the Workplace

machine tools can cause boredom when thereis no immediate need for operator interventionand application of problem-solving skills. Inaddition, Skilled NC operators who did notwrite programs reported that operating an NCmachine was significantly less challengingthan operating a conventional machine.

Work-related stress is a significant feature ofcomputer-automated workplaces. Stress is asso-ciated with working on very complicated, ex-pensive, and highly integrated systems, andwith lack of autonomy at work, extending insome cases to computerized monitoring bymanagement. The combination of the complex-ity of the system and the pressure to minimizedowntime because of the high cost of lost pro-duction adds up to substantial stress for somemaintenance workers. Although each situationis different, excessive boredom and/or stresscan often degrade the productivity of individ-

- ual workers.On the other hand, the introduction of pro-

grammable automation tends to have a favor-able impact on the physical surroundings ofwork. For instance, robots are amenable tohazardous tasks in environments that are un-pleasant and unhealthy for workers. However,certain precautions are necessary to avoidpotential new safety hazards. In response toconcerns about robot safety, groups in theUnited States, Western Europe, and Japan areproviding guidelines for the safe use of robots.

Since the introduction of PA will increasethe number of workers using video display ter-minals (VDTs) and reduce the number operatMg production machinery, the concerns thatare currently being raised about potentialVDT hazards apply to a whole new set ofworkers, including CAD operators. Althoughthere is no evidence that VDTs emit unsafe

. levels of radiation or that VDT use is hazard=ous to vision, increased stress levels due toprolonged use of VDTs have been reported,and further study of the long-term effects ofVDT use is necessary.

Overall, the potential physical hazards appearto be more amenable to solution than some of

the psychological ones because they are moreeasily recognized and less subject to the subtle-ties of individual personalities. The relief ofsuch symptoins as boredom and stress is moredifficult, because they are not well understoodand are often complicated by other factors notrelated to the workplace. Depending on howtasks are arranged and jobs designed; program-mable automation has the potential to decreasethe amount of autonomy, control, and challengeavailable to the worker; or it can increase vari-ety and decisionmaking opportunities.

Management's strategies and motivations for-----introducing programmable automation are keyin determining its impacts. In additionthena=tune of labor-management relations will affectthe implementation of new technology and itsconsequences for the work environment. Inwork environments that are becoming moreand more automated, management is likely toseek increasing flexibility in deploying work-ers. This will be reflected incollective bargain-ing demandS.frorn management for changingwork ruleS, in return for union demands forsuch employee benefits as job security. For-mal latior=management cooperation in solvingworkplace problems has been growing in theUnited States. Where successful, these partic-ipative arrangements are likely to have a pos-itive influence on the effects of new technologyin the workplace, especially in the areas of jobdesign, changing skills, and training.

In Europe and Japan, mechanisms for deal=ing with workplace concerns have generallybeen applied to the introduction of new tech-nology. In many cases laws specify how suchintroduction is-to be handled. For example, thelaws of West Germany, Norway, and. Swedenprovide for worker involvement in technolog-ical change, and labor is routinely representedon corporate boards. It is important, however,to point out that the culture and traditions ofEurope and Japan regarding attitudes andpractices in the workplace differ from thoseof the United States, especially in the area oflabor-management relations. These differenceslimit the transferability of foreign practices.

Ch. 1Summary 11

Education, Training, andRetraining Issues

Programmable automation is one of a num-ber of forces that will reshape instructionalservices in the United States in the yearsahead and create new demands for high-qual-ity education, training, and retraining pro-grams, as well as career guidance, job counsel-ing, and placement services.

A prerequisite of PA-related instruction of alltypes is a strong foundation of basic skillspar-ticularly reading, science; and math. The highlevel of functional illiteracy in the United Statespopulation is amajor barrier to development ofPA-related skills. Basic skills deficiencies havealready surfaced as a problem in retrainingsome displaced manufacturing workers forjobs working with PA.

Analytical and problem-solving skills are in-creasing in importance for some skilled tradespersonnel and technicians, as well as otheroccupational groups common to automatedfacilities. Many who work with PA find them-selves using conceptual skills more than motorskills. However, it is uncertain to what extentPA will require a substantial increase in theaggregate level of problem-solving and concep-tual skill. As noted earlier, choices for im-plementing the technology can result in widevariations in worker input and control, andconsequently a range of skill requirements.

Development'of multiple skills and the "crosstraining" of workers_to perform a variety offunctions on the shop floor are emerging instruc-tional requirements for automated facilities,although not reflected as yet in many estab-lished instructional programs. Beyond acquir-ing a familiarity with PA, engineers in auto-mated facilities need to develop an under-standing of the entire design-to-manufacturingprocess and of how computerized equipmentmay be integrated with other machines andpeople for maximum efficiency and productivi-ty. Continued industry pressure for more ef-fective technical managers may well lead togreater emphasis on the development of man-

agement skills in industrial engineering andcomputer science education programs.

. .There is an 'immediate need for retrammg and

job counseling programs geared to the uniqueneeds of displaced workers. In the past, manyprograms for displaced workers have failed toassess their existing competencies and provideopportunities to strengthen basic skills. As aresult, participation rates have been low anddropout rates high in such retrainingprograms.

Ongoing changes in workplace skill require-ments attributable to programmable automa-tion and other factors point.to the need for ef-fective education and career guidance servicesfor youth and adults. Individuals need accessto current, reliable labor market informationin order to make informed career choices andto pursue appropriate avenues of occupationalpreparation. The potential for frequent jobchange within the same economic sector oracross sectors suggests that the numbers ofadults seeking job counseling and placementassistance will increase dramatically in theyears ahead. At present; there are few programsthat provide these kinds of education and careerguidance services to youth and adults on anongoing basis.

While some institutions and organizationsare providing PA instruction that addressescurrent skills requirements of computer-auto-mated fadlities, there are as yet no standardapproaches to curriculum. A common charac-teristic of successful programmable automationinstructional programs examined by OTA wasclose cooperation and collaboration amongeducators, industry, labor, and government in

. assessing needs, developing curricula, and otheractivities.

On the whole, the U.S. instructional systemmay not now be able to accommodate the poten-tial demand for PA-related skills; which may inturn affect the rate of growth in PA applica-tions. Shortages of technical instructors, state-of-the-art equipment and other resources aremajor problems for all segments of the instruc-tional system, including industry-based educa-tion and training.

23

12 Computeriz,-, Manufac.tiking Automation: Employment; Education, and the Workplace

Programmable Automation Industries. _While PA industries vary in size, there ap-

pear to be several hundred vendors in all. PAfirms range frOm small companies supplyingproducts to meet specialized market niches;to automation "supermarket" firms that of-fer multiple forms of PA. Many PA vendOisare so- called turnkey firms; which packagecomponents made by different companies withsoftware and other features into standard Orcustomized systems. Small; innovative firm§have played a key role as PA producer§.

CAD; NC, rebiitS, and other PA equipmentand systein§ are Sold by industries that aremore Or less Separate. NC is the oldest andlargest industry, dating from the 1950's;While CAD and robots were available by the1960'S, Significant markets for them did notemerge until the 1970's. Markets for other PAproducts also began to flourish in the 1970's.

Although they grew slowly during the1960's and early 1970's, programmable t.-ito-mation markets grew rapidly in recent years andare expected to Continue to do so. Hence, it ishard to deScribe firma and industries in endur-ing terms. Moreover, as individual companiesexpand their product offerings and move toOffer complementary products, a market forCIM may emerge. No one yet sells "CIM" asa total product, and some in industry contendthat users are still pioneering the concept.

PA firths will affect the economy throughtheir relationships with other industries aswell as through their role as ernployers; MuchOf their economic impact will be realized in-directly, since their principal customers areother businesses that may use PA to improvetheir Own performance. Programmable automa-tion industries are likely to become increasinglyimport-tad to the industrial base and nationalsecurity of the United States, because of iiiereite=ins dependence on programmable automatioAboth to enhance manufacturing productivityoverall and to manufacture defense equipment.

Competition among PA firms tends to cen-ter on software and customer services ratherthan on hardware features; This reflects

growth in sales of PA systems (as opposed tosingle pieces of equipment). Indeed; PA ven-dora often rely on outside sources of hardware.They are offering a growing number of pre-and post-sale services, including applicationsengineering, training, maintenance, and soft-ware updates.

Programmable automation industries arecharacterized by high levels of interchange be-tween finis. Licen§ing, outsourcing, mergersand acquisition, limited equity investments;and joint ventures_ are common, and often oc-cur between fix-ms from different countries. Inhis regard, PA industries are similar to the

overall information-processing and electronicsproducts industries. It is likely that verticalintegration will continue to be limited and co-operative arrangements will continue to bemade because new products are increasinglycomplex, product changes occur rapidly, andproduct development costs are growing. In thelong term, however, international cross-fertili;nation may abate in favor of direct foreigninvestment.

In the near term, the growth of domestic pro-ducera of PA depends on whether domestic eco-nomic conditions are favorable to investment,and on the ability of U.S. managers to justifythe necessary invest nents. Anticipated reduc=tions in PA costs and growing understandingamong managers of the potential benefits andcosts of PA are likely to make companies in-creasingly receptive to PA. In the longtern,competition from foreign firms in domestic andforeign markets may constrain the growth andsize of programmable automation industries.Companies from many countries, often sup-ported by foreign governments, have been in-volved in PA development and productionsince the 1960'S, and may countries considerPA industrie§ important features of theireconomies.

Research and DevelopmentBoth industry and government fund a broad

range of research and development (R&D) inprogrammable automation. This work is un-

Ch. 1Summary 13

dertaken in industry, miiversity, and govern-ment laboratories.

Total Federal funding of automation R&D infiscal year 1984 is budgeted at approximately$80 milliom through four primary Governmentagenciesthe Department of Defense (DOD),the National Aeronautics and Space Admin-istration (NASA), the National Science Foun-dation (NSF),_ and the National Bureau ofStandards (NBS) (see table 3). R&D at bOthDOD and NASA is strongly mission-oriented(directed toward a particular agency goal), andit has limited applicability to commewial man-ufacturing. More generic or basic work is con-ducted through NSF and NBS.

DOD's Manufacturing 'Technology Programbudgeted approximately $56 million in 1984for work on automation technologies thatcould save money in defense manufacturing.Two other agencies within DOD, the DefenseAdvanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA)and the Office of Naval Research (ONELbudgeted approximately $8 million for research in P A technologies for ultimate use inboth defense manufacturing and battlefieldapplications. Though DOD work in program-

able automation is not intended to be widelyapplicable to commercial manufacturing, DODsets themes for technology development in pro-grammable automation. It serves as an informal

T -ble 3. Federal Funding of Research andDevelopment in Programmable Automation,

Fiscal Year 1984 (dollars in millions)

Military agencies:Manufacturing Technology (ManTech)

Program $56.00Defense Advanced Research Projects

A_gency (DARPA) ........ 3.50Office of Naval Research (ONR) 4.10

Military subtotal $63.60

Civilian agencies:National Bureau of Standards (NBS) $3.85National Aeronautics and Space

Administration (NASA) 5.90National Science Foundation (NSF) 6.90-9.20

Civilian subtotal $16.65-18.95Total Federal funding $80.25-82.55SOURCE: Office of Technology Assessment.

coordination point for Government agencies anddefense industries.

NASA's automation research concentrateson robotic tools_ for use in space. The researchprogram is spell and focused on technologiesthat are very sophisticated by commercialstandards, though there are occasional spin-offs to commercial manufacturing.

NSF plays a small but important role infunding basic research in PA. The ProductionResearch Program at NSF focuses on automa-tion technologies, while at least a dozen otherprograms within NSF fund automation-re-lated research to some degree. Total fundingfor 1984 is estimated to be about $7 millionto $9 million.

NBS has a rather unique role in automationR&D in that it is the Government'sprimary in-house laboratory for such work. NBS pursuesautomation R&D in standards (e.g., standard-ization of programing languages and standard-ization of interfaces between computerizedtools), metrology (measurement of parts using .

computerized devices), and schemes for inte-grated manufacturing. NBS' Automated Man-ufacturing Research Facility, funded largelythrough DOD, is perhaps the only full-scale test-ing facility for CIM in the United States.

Estimates of CAD, robotics, and machine toolindustry funding of automation R&D_ rangefrom $264 million to $400 million in1983, andthey grow rapidly in the future as the industriesexpand. There is evidence of increased coopera-tion between industries and universities in theconduct of automation R&D. In particular,university-industry centers for R&D in pro-grammable automation are proliferating.

The United 'States continues to be a worldleader in many areas of R&D, including comput-er-aided design, software in general, and virtu-ally all areas of basic research. Japan has de-veloped substantial soplti8tication in manyareas of robotics R&D, while Japan and WestGermany are both strong in machine tool re-search. Both Japan and Western Europeancountries also do significant research regard-ing manufacturing integration problems.Western European countries; notably Sweden

2 5

14 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employrnent, Education; and the Workplace

and West Germany, conduct substantial re-search in work environment issues, while theissues receive only minimal attention in theUnited States.

International ,Policy ComparisonsAll of the major industrialized nations sup-

port the development and use of PA to someextent._However, the lack of accurate, up-to-date information about the details of foreigngovernment programs makes speculationabout their effectiveness extremely risky.

Historical differences in national character-istics have strongly affected PA use interna-tionally. For both Japan and Western Euro-pean countries, these characteristics includea greater concern for cost reductionpresum-ably due to greater dependence on export mar-kets, and to higher energy, materials, andcapital costs than those in the United Statesprior to the 1970't. These factors have led togreater concern abroad for manufacturingprocesses with lets materials waste, betterproduct detign, and low-cost production. The

/fact that the United States now faces similarconstraints and a more competitive- nterna-

' tional environment is motivating U.S. manu-facturers to focus more closely on manufactur-ing processes.

Government involvement in automation inJapan is substantial, but it_is less monolithicthan many believe. The influence of Japan'sMinistry of International Trade and Industry(MITI) on Japanese industry is ebbing,although MITI continues to develop long-termplans for technological development and _totarget certain areas of technology for particu-lar attention, such as robotics and microelec-tronics. Private industry expenditures com-prise a greater percentage of total R&Dspending in Japan than in any other country,in part due to the near absence of JapaneseGovernment R&D in defense. The Govern-ment has, however, played a substantial rolein encouraging application of new technologiesin small and medium-sized firms and in facili-tating cooperative efforts among PA produc-ers and users.

Like the United States, the West GermanGovernment has no systematic industrial pol-icy. It has played a large role in encouragingprivate-in ustry investment, however, and hasallocated large sums to semiautonomous re-search institutes and consortia which performR&D related to manufacturing. In addition,the Government has established an AdvancedManufacturing Technologies Program to pro-mote the riskier forms of innovation in thissector. Though the use of automation technol-ogies We§t Germany is not as extensive asin the United States or Japan, the West Ger-mans have characteristically_ good govern-ment-labor-management relations which facil-itate the introduction of new technology.

Sweden and Norway have recently begun todevote resources_to PA in order to bolster eco-nomic growth. Thete countries are strong mrobotics, work environment research, and edu-cation and training programs.

The Finch Government has a firm com-mitment to faster development and diffusionof PA, linking Government support to broad-based plans for restructuring French indus-tries. Despite the availability of Governmentfunds and loans, however, industry has notparticipated in Government programs to theextent anticipated.

Although the British Government is less in-volved in domestic industry_ than the Japaneseor French, the United Kingdom has develoa set of "schemts" to promote investments inPA. These inel de loans and grants for con-sultants to help'develop automation, and vari-ous mechanismt for support of industry anduniversity R&D.

Italy has nothough it promunderdevelopedItaly is rapidlyrobots, and leaneered new app

Canada and thpromote PA tohave fledglingnisms for enco

verall industrial policy, al-tes private investment _in itsouthern regions. In addition,ecorning a major producer ofrig_ Italian-firms have pio-cations.Netherlands have begun toher economic growth. They

&D programs and media-aging application of PA.

Ch, 1Summary 15

Implications for Federal Policy_ _

The overarching policy question that ehlergesfrom this assessment is "Should there be -ena_-tional strategy for the development and use ofprogrammable automation ?" The opportunitiesand problems_pos&cl by PA are interconnect-ed.Successfiil policy regarding PA must thereforemesh actions in several areas, something thatcan only be achieved through a multifacetedstrategy. Further, the current uses and im-pacts of PA are a fraction of what they are ex-pected to be in the long term; Thus; there isan opportunity for anticipatory Federal policy.

The principal issues which motivate interestin new policymaking include the` relative im-maturity of the technologies and lack of ex-perience in their application; the fact thatother countries are stimulating developmentand use of PA; the risk of unemploymentgrowth as a result of PA use; both regionallyand nationally; the risk of adverse. effects onthe psychological aspects of thework environ-ment; and the ramifications of PA for educa-tion; training; and retraining.

A policy strategy for PA would have to bal-ance the interests of a large and diverse groupof stakeholders:

The . dvelopers'and_ producers of PApriMarily concerned with fUnding and fa-cilities for R&D,_ as well as general eco-nomic policies which affect markets forthe technologies.The users_of PA focus on competition intheir product markets. While they tendto resist government intervention in_pro-duction and personnel areas, they call forimprovements in tax and trade laws andother policies which influence the businessclimate.Members of the labor force care aboutwhether they can get and keep jobs, whatkind of jobs are open to them, and theirrelations with management. ,Mhile ap-proximately 20 percent of the labor forceis represented by labor organizations, the

bulk of the working population has nofocused way to articulate its concerns.Communities and State and local govern-ments are particularly concerned abouteconomic development and maintainingtheir employment base.Educators and trainers are concernedabout the funding, equipment,vand facili-ties available to them, as well as makingcurricula responsive to new technologiesand skill needs.Finally, the Federal Government hasbroad interests_ in the development andapplication of PA, including its use forbuilding defense equipment, as well as itseffect on productivity, economic growth,employment, and -occupational safety andhealth.

Policy StrategiesIf the Federal Go' vernment chooses to com-

dinate activities in areas of technology develop-ment and use employment, work environment,and instruction, it can pursue one of four-basicstrategies:

I. laissez-faire=a continuation of currentpolicies;

2. tecFaiology-orientedemphasis on program -mable automation development and use;

3. human resource-orientedupfront attentionto education and training, work environ-raent, and job creation; or

4. both technology- and human resource-oriented.

The principal uncertainties clouding projec-tions are the rate of advance of the technolo-gies, and the relative success of efforts abroadto develop and apply PA and to increase salespenetration in domestic and foreign markets.The state of the economy is also a major anduncertain influence.

The principal arguments for a laissez-fairestrategy are that additional Federal involve-ment may not be necessary for effective use

16 Computerized Manufacturing Automatibn: Employment; Education; and the Workplace

of PA; and that it may be too early in the ap-plication_of PA to assess appropriate Federalactions. The disadvantages of this strategy arethe risk that other countries may adopt andbenefit froth PA faSter than the United States,and the risk of losing an opportunity to adoptpolicieS that could not only maximize the ef-fective use of PA but also minimize negativesocial consequences.

A technology-oriented strategy,--_-bolsteringR &D as well as encouraging applications ofthe technologiescould help avert a declinein industrial output and employthent causedby competitive losses to foreign industries.Other advantages of such a strategy are thatit would help ensure U.S. technological superi-ority; and it could bolster national security bymaintaining a sound industrial base. However;even if greater use of PA were a decisive com-petitive aid to U.S. firms, a strictly technolo-gy- oriented strategy could aggravate unem-ployment and work environment problems; asWell as strain the capacities of education andtraining systems. The postponed costs of atechnology-oriented strategy; particularly forassisting displaced workers; may offset someOf the potential economic benefits of suchplan.

A human resource-oriented strategy would in-volVe upfront investment in evaluating skillrequirements, tailoring education; training;and retraining programs, and conducting re-search in relevant work environment and edu-cational impacts of PA. a strategy couldstabilize or diminish future adjustmentassistance spending; and could Prevent workenvironment problems; While human resourcedevelopment can facilitate the use of PA andotherwise improve productivity, its eff6ctS onindustrial output_ levels may be less evidentthan the effects of technology-orientd policy.The major disadvantage of a primarily humanresource-oriented strategy is that it might notimprove productivity or competitivenessenough to offset trends in other countries. Asin the laissez-faire strategy, the United Stateswould run the risk of a further erosion in in-

the risk of a further erosion in industrial out-put levels and loss of technological superiority.

A combined technology- and human resource-oriented strategy could ensure technologydevelopment and increased competitivenesswhile minimizing social fallout. It would recog-nize the complementary contributions ofequipment and of people in production, andhelp assure that_human impacts are explicit-ly considered in PA development and use. Thedisadvantages of such a combined approachinclude the administrative and legal burdensof coordinating a wide range of Federal activ-ities.

Specific Policy OptionsTechnology Development and Diffusion

Existing Federal policy toward manufactur-ing technology is piecemeal attest In the areaof R&D, four agencies with distinctly differentmandateS fund automation research, althoughonly a small portion of this work has generalapplicability for commercial manufacturing.Only in the area of defense procurement isthere a concerted Federal effort to coordinateproduct and process technology developmentand application.

Option: Fund Research and Develop-ment.CongresS could act to increase PAR&D by influencing both the overall level offunding and its = distribution to variousagen-cies and research topics. The current environ-ment for PA R&D is relatively healthy. How-ever, funding for more long-term, genericresearch in nonmilitary application areas isrelatively thin. Since the bulk of federallysponsored R&D is centered on military appli-cations, Congress may wish to raise fundingspecifically for generic research, primarilythrough the National Science Foundation andNational Bureau of Standards. Congress mayalso wish to increase funding for _standardsand human factors research, which could fa-cilitate the application of programmable auto=mation across a wide range of industries.

18 Computerized Manufacturing AthPirM lot): nt. Euoation, and the Workplace

PA may lead to ill-considered 41,13LichtiOna aridexcessive problems for employpeA arlid commu-nities.

Federal options for facilitating kwplicationof PA primarily involve removing tiarriers.These options include assistance i.r, providingcapital for the purchase or lea iof ktutoinationequipment, and providing infOrina6011 aboutPA to manufacturers.

Measures to encourage adoptiOn ofPA, how-ever; are only a partial and Nhortteral solu-tion to manufacturing problenm._tv, itoger-tetrnsolution invelireS redressing the listurieal U.R.inattention to manufacturing pPcceat40,organi-zation, and management. Thougll thkte is someevidence that the private sector h0 begun toaddreSS this need, Congress catild NAYportant role in fostering the k.lve):99/11ent ofengineering curricula in uniVersik.i0a _whichcombine manufacturing, degi-1-, mid humatresource management activitik5; ag We as en-couraging research in rnanufaaari_tig en heer=ing topics. Further, Congres Asta11isome

soe form of "manufacturing itstita4

t, p6r=haps building on the research ekritaJA already

for manufacturing teChnoloky, or anizatien,at IBS or at universities, to P17:stf:etul-ltse

and management issues. Suchco ci-serve-as-aiijiriforitiatiO-clehringhollSsfor manufacturers, as well as 0 ail* tank withrotating fellowehipS for people frobi all Partsof the manufacturing sector,

EmploymentThe United States has had 1)100 Federal

programs for employment sihee De-programsera. Excluding educatiArl ayhi trTnirig

programs (see later in this oilaptvt,), existingFederal employment policy 0:,Ver four broadcategories: 1) the developrnot awl distribu.tion of labor-market inforrofition, incomemaintenance for the unernplOyqq, 3) laborstandards, and 4) job creatio4, CorAparecl withpoliciesin most European cAultlityle3 and Ja-pan, U.S. labor market policy 1s tk active anduncoordinated, and it is not litiked tO other,industry:oriented programs for stpeetural ad-justment in the national ecOnerny,

Option: .Maintain the Status Quo. -=ExistingFederal programs provide relatively limitedFederal involvement in employment change.Though some might argue that this level ofinvolvement is appropriate, the existing setof programs and institutions have severaldrawbacks. In the last two decades, Federalemployment policy has come to focus on short-term programs for aiding disadvantagedgroups of people (low-income or chronically un-employed or underemployed). In particular,current programs are ill-equipped to deal withlong-term shifts in labor demand arising fromtechnological and economic changes, growinguncertainty in skill requirements, and ex-tended unemployment among groups otherthan the disadvantaged. Similarly, they arenot de-Signed to deal with large regional di-a-paritieS in unemployment, a problem that PAwill likely aggravate in the near term.

Option: Establish Programs for Job Crea-tion. Job creation programs can help de-crease unemployment, as wellas stimulate me-nomic_growth and help build the skills of thework force. The principal problem in devel-oping a job creation program is to avoid pay-ing for jobs that employers would have createdanyway, and to avoid merely shifting employ-

_ ment from one industry to another, either ofwhich would duninigh net job-growth.

Job creation programs range from the moatgeneral (i.e., expansionary macroeconomic pol-icy) to specific measures to stimulate hiring,including tax credits, incentives for domesticproduction, change in average work hours, andincreased pp:Auction of public goods and serv-ices. In particular, the latter two types of jobcreation programs might be considered in theface of persistent labor surpluses. Althoughreducing average work hours can spread workamong a larger group of people, individualemployees may experience real wage losses.The actual costs and benefits of reducing workhours depend on how such a program is struc-tured.

Similarly, stimulating production of so-called public goods and services would alsocreate jobs. Production of public good§ and

Ch. 1Summary it

services doeS not have to be met by expandedpublic sector employment. As in the case ofdefense procurement, public investment canstimulate private sector employment. "Pub-lic goods and services" can include a multitudeof activitiesfrom highway building to childcare. The principal disadvantage of publicgoods programs Iristorically has been the di=version of resources from private goods pre=duction.

Option: Expand Programs for Labor-Mar-ket Information. PA offers the prospect ofradical and ongoing changes in the deploy-ment of labor among manufacturing firms;Monitoring of employment patterns by ex-panded collection and analysis of occupationalemployment data would provide a means ofmeasuring the rate; extent, and direction ofchange. Expanded data collection by the De=partment of Labor and the Bureau of the Cen=sus would improve their ability to describe andforecast employment trends, and it would im-prove the information they disseminate to ed=ucators; counselors, and individualS. It wouldalso provide data for comparing staffing pat-terns among firmsinformation that would beuseful to managers, labor organizations, andeducators. The primary argument againstsuch efforts to expand labor-market informa-tion is rooted in the desire to reduce paperworkrequired of businesses, and to limit Govern-ment statistics to those that are specificallyneeded by Federal agencies.

Option: Expand Adjustment AssistancePrograms. Expanded programs for incomemaintenance or relocation assistance may benecessary to ease adjustment problems causedby PA and a variety of other factors. Althoughthe debate over aid to displaced workers tendsto focus on external aid, actions by employersthemselves may also serve to ease employ-ment shifts. Congress might consider legisla-tion to encourage advance notice of technolog-ital change, which allows workers to plan forchange, evaluate training needs; and seek newwork. Employers often resist advanee noticerequirements; however; arguing that teChno=logical change is a management prerogative.Another measure that Congress might consid-

er for employer actions would be financial in-centives to relocate personnel either within oroutside the firm.

Work EnvironmentOTA!s analysis suggests that the area

where PA itself may motivate the greatest departure from past Federal policy is work envi-ronment. Because PA will eventually affectthe work environment of most manufacturingpersonnel, especially in metalworking manufacturing, and because it poses potential newproblem8 pertaining to the psychological aspectS of the work environment, this technolo-gy raises questions about the adequacy of existing mechanisms for studying, monitoringand regulating workplace conditions.

Option: No Increased Federal Role.Al.though no single policy instrument specificallyaddresses the impactsof PA on the work en.vironment, various meChanisms are already irplace at the Federal, State, and local level:that cover workplace concerns in general, particularly in the areas of health and safety. Further, a few efforts have begun in both the private and public Sectors to plan for th(workplace effects of the introduction to nemtechnology. Finally, it may be too early in th(development and application of PA to devis(an appropriate Federal role. All the above concerns might argue for retaining the status quo

However, work environmentjssues are similar in some ways to other problems, such a:pollution, which are not easily solved by th(private sector on its own. With current estimates of union membership in the Unite(States totaling about one-fifth of all workersthere is a large segment of the population thaiwill not have a focused way_ to articulate wortenvironment concerns. Finally, there is agreaideal to be learned about the effects of PA orthe workplace, and such research must beginimmediately in order to help improve, thworkplace as adoption of PA accelerates.

Option: Increase Oversight and Monitoring.C9gress could increase the emphasi:placed on the workplace effects of computerized manufacturing automation through it

3i

20 Computerized Manufacturing Aut. Lion: Employment; Education, and th6 Workplace

oversight and monitoring activities; Consid-erable oversight has been provided on theseissues by a number of congressional commit-tees over the past several years. In:additionto its own oversight activities, Congress coulddesignate monitoring responsibilities to theOccupational Safety and Health Ad ministra-tion (OSHA) and the National Instittite for Oc-cupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). Whilesuch oversight.doUld infohn Congress and thepublic about workplace concerns and cover awide range of settings, it might result in apiecemeal effort with little or no coordinationof activities or sharing of information.

Option: Increase Support for Work Envi-ronment Research.Congress could supportresearch; through such agencies as NIOSH,NSF; and the Department of Labor, on boththe short- and long-term social impact§ of PAon the workplace. Potential areas researchmight include the physical and paythologicaleffects of PA, management strategies and pol-icies in introducing and using PA, worker par-ticipation, identification of hazards and howto control_ them, changes in work content andorganization, and changes in organizationalstructure,_ among others. Research would beparticularly valuable for identifying tech-niques to measure nonphysical problems in theworkplace. Demonstration projects; seminars,and experiments would enhance understand-ing of the effects of PA and the extent towhich it can be shaped to improve the workenvironment.

Current research on the social impacts of PAon the manufacturing work environment ismodest in scope and support; reflecting thelimited amount of interest and funding avail-able for this purpose. By contrast; study of theimpacts of new technology on the workplaceis more common in Japan and Western Eur7ope; where the subject has historically receivedmore attention across sectors.

Option: Set NeW Standards. New safetyand health standards may be required to ad-dress problems associated with the use of PA.Reliable information would be needed on thenumbers of people at risk,' the nature of the

risks, and'the potential costs and benefits ofestablishing and enforcing new regulations.

Option: Promulgate Omnibus Work Envi-ronment Legislation.-=-Other aspects of the in-troduction of new technology into the wOrk-place, beyond safety and, health concerns;

,; suggest that a broader approach to work enVi-, ronment policy may be desirable; These as-pects include the potential for excessive sur-veillance of workers and the disparity inworker and management understanding ofboth the choices available in adopting PA andtheie workplace ramifications; In addition, abroader approach would-ensure that the inter=ests of all workers would be protected.

A number of European countries have takenan omnibus approach to workplace concerns:In Norway and Sweden, for instance; work en-vironment legislation has been in effect since1977. One purpose of this legislation is to pro-tect workers' mental as well as physical healthin the workplace; particularly in the contextof technology change; another is to give em=ployees an opportunity to:influence the designof the work environment.

Education, Training, and RetrainingThe Federal role in education has tradi-

tionally been that of supplementing or enhanc-ing State and local activities. In recent yearsthere has been a movement toward lesSeningdirect Federal involvement. In contrast, theFederal role in training and retraining ef-fortsparticularly for the economically disad-vantagedhas been dominant since the mid-1960's. In keeping with the trend towarddecentralization, the recently enacted JobTraining Partnership Act (JTPA) shifts re-sponsibility for administration and regulationof federally funded training and retrainingactivities to the States.

Option: No Increased Federal Rale.As inother areas affected by PA, it may be too earlyto assess the appropriate Federal role in educa-tion, training, and retraining related to PA.However, if the Federal Government chose notto modify its existing programs, it would for-

32

Ch. 1Summary 21

go potential roles unlikely to be assumed byother levels of government or the private sec-tor, such as assisting in the coordination of in-structional activities; ensuring that adequatelabor market and occupational forecasts aredeveloped; and ensuring that information de-rived from such forecasts is actively dissemi-nated to individuals, educators; and trainers.

Option: Increase Support for Facilities,Equipment, and Qualified Instructors. Con-gress could consider options such as tax incen-tives for the purchase of state4A-the-art equip-ment for training, and funding to establishselected educational facilities and maintainthem for use in periods of intense demand forPA instruction; Congress is currently consid-ering legislation to encourage interest in mathand science teaching; engineering education;and other forms of technical instruction. Whilethese measures could reniave_many of the bar-Hers to the establishment of PAinstructional

` .programs, they might also stimulate too muchinterest in PA instruction at the expense ofother types of education and training.

`Option: Encourage Curriculum Develop-ment; Congress could enact a grant programto fUnd the development of curricula gearedto the development of PA-related skills. En-couraging comprehensive curriculum_ designand the ebtalilishment of voluntary guidelinesfor curriculum content at various levels wouldguarantee some degree of itandarclitation toboth enrollees and employers.

Option: Encourage Renewed Emphasis onBasic Skills and ProbleMSolving Smells, Con-gress could choose to encourage at all levelsof instruction a renewed,emphasis on strong,basic skills in readingimith; and science. Spe-cial emphasis could be placed on the develop-ment of individual; problem-solving skills,since these are important prerequisites totraining for careers in computerized manufac-turing, as well as for nonmanufactUring occu-pations.

This option could make the labor supPlymore resilient in the long term by raising the

overall skill level. It could also create a foun-dation of skills that could be enhanced overtime through the development of job-relatedskills; including those associated with PA.Finally; this approach would not feed the proc-ess of "skills obsolescence" by tying individualinstruction too closely to specific technologies.

Option: Encourage Individual Participationin PA-Related Instruction. Possible meas-ures already being considered by Congress tomake individual participation in instructionmore economical include individual tax incen-tives (e.g., deductions for spending on train-ing for a new occupation); the designation_oftraining as an allowable expense under the Un-employment Insurance System; and the estab=lishment of individual education or training ac-counts- Incentives to individuals would beparticularly valuable in instances where em-ployers do not provide PA-related instruction-to their employees beyond the level of intro-ductory training.

Option: Encourage Industry-Based Instruc-tion: Few users of PA equipment currentlyhave or plan to establish in-house instructionalprograms. Congress could choose to encourageusers of programmable equipment to establishor enhance in-house technical training pro-grams through the creation of tax incentivesthat help defray the costs of instructors, equip-ment, expansion of instructional facilities, andcurriculum development.

Option: Intensify Research Efforts. Con-gress could choOse to increase Federal spon-sorship of research to identify changing skillsrequirements within manufacturing occupa-tions, 'arid to provide for broad-based dissem-ination of the findings to better equip educa-tors and trainers for curriculum development.Congress could also use a research programto encourage the development of instructionalstandards that are in keeping with PA skillsrequirements.

Chapter 2

Introduction

3q

ContentsPage

Background 25

Study Approach, Organization, and Methodology 27

Approach 27

Organization and Methodology 28

Congr iessonal Interest and Policy 29

Table

Table NO.zL Representative Recent COng-ressional Hearings Relevant to

Programmable Automation

Page

29

Chapter 2

Introduction

BackgroundA new wave of automation is spreading

through manufacturing industries, and like itspredecessors, it is receiving a mixed welcome.Computerized manufacturing automationthe application of electronic computer andcommunication tools to manufacturingisviewed both as contributing to the problemsfaced by the U.S. economy and as part of thesolution to those problems.* Those who viewit optimistically emphasize its potential to im-prove productivity, work environment; prod-uct quality; and ultimately competitiveness.Those taking the opposite view argue that itwill cause massive unemployment; make manyjobs less rewarding; and provoke a retrainingcrisis. The rhetoric used by both sides makesit difficult to appraise the technologies and,moreimportantly, to determine what policiesmay be appropriate.

The economic and social effects of comput-ers and automation in manufacturing havearoused concern since the late 1950's. Duringthe late 1950's and early 1960's, people grewmore aware of the potential uses of computertechnology, while adoption of so-called hardor dedicated. automation began to accelerate.Studies conducted_ uring that period, includ-ing the report of a Federal study commission,drew conclusions about potential job loss,changing work conditions, and instructionalneeds that remain valid today.' Because oftechnological developments and falling costsfor computing during the late 1960's and the1970's, the prospects for significant social andeconomic change resulting from wide use of

*The subject of this report is described as "manufacturing"rather than "facto" automation in order to emphasize thatthese tools_ can be applied not only to the fabrication of prod.ucts but also to the critical ftuncdons of product design_ andmanufacturink management. Related office autOmation tech-nologzes is being-evaluated in a forthcoming OTA study, "In-formation and Communication Technologies and_ the Office."

'Report of the National Commission on Technology; Auto-mation, and Economic Progress. 1966:

computer technologies are more immediate to-day than before.

The currentxave of automation is unlike itspredecessorsin severalwayS: Programmableautomation (PA) can collect and process infor-mation as well as do physical work, Allowingequipment for design, production, and man-agement to be linked together. It can improveproduct quality by raising consistency andcontrol in production. And it can be used inproducing a range of pro-ducts because of itsreprogrammability. This trait, in particular,lies behind claims for PA "flexibility". Thesefeatures make PA economical in productionof much smaller quantities than hard automa-tion, which is largely restricted to large quan-tity or mass production. They make PA ap-plicable across a wide range of industries,whereas the applicability of conventional hardautomation is much more- limited. PA willhave a major influence on skill requirements,product design and variety, production costs,job content; and the organization-and manage-ment of manufacturing. Its features are funda-mental to the potential changes in employ-ment, work environment, and education andtraining needs that area focus of this report.

The technical features of programmableautomation and their economic and social ram-ifications will continue to make PA _a sourceof controversy over the next decade. In partic-ular, the economic aspects are central to theargument proponents make for rapid develop-ment and diffusion of programmable automa-tion. Proponents claim that, in the currentclimate of international competition, manufac-turing firms must either automate or moveproduction overseas if they are to continue inbusiness.* The basic argument states that PAwill make domestic manufacturing more effi-

*Barring. that is, significant changes in import restraints orthe value of the dollar.

36

26 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, EducatiOn, and the Workplace

cient and competitive, and it will therebycontribute to economic groWth and greateremployment;

The focus on economic growth reflects con-cern Over the slow growth in productivity andeconomic output experienced during the1970's and early 1980's. During that time,U.S. industries lost shares in domestic andforeign mat keLs lo-foreigri=ebiripetitors, prin-cipally the Japanese; While the Causes and sig-nificance of these phenomena are debated evenamong experts, popular consensus deems akey cause to be different production costsin particular, different labOr costsamongcountries and iriCistrieb. Lower costs abroadfor labor have been a major reason; but not-the only one,* for increases in overseas pro-duction by U.S. manufacturers as well as forincreased imports of manufacturing goods.Against this background, the labor-savingsaspects of PA technologies have taken onspecial significance.

UnfortunatelY, the popular focus on thelabor-savings aspects of progranunable auto-mation is misleading: It plays on historic ten-sions between labor and management in thiscountry, and it ignores the role of manage-ment, prOduet design, and other cost factorsin determining a company's ability to com-pete, There is a risk that, by emphasizing theone-fOr=One substitution of machines for peo-ple, Companies will use PA inefficiently; theymay ignore critical differences between whatpeople and machines can do best, and theymay ignore less tangible but effective optionsfor improving human resource management orresponsiveness to customer needs."

*Other reasons includesuch factors as differences in materi-

als and energy costs, differences in capital markets, the ex-change rate, and changes in market size.

**This capital!spending bias was brought out by a recent sur-

vey of industrial engineers. (Institute of Industrial Engineers,"ProductivitY T6day: An Inside Report," 1983.) As one reporter

noted, It seems clear that while more companies could bene-fit from trying to better use their employees, the role -of capitalspendingtraditionally the 'quick fix' for improved industrialperformance will remain a major component of corporate strat-egy." Philip Moeller, "Firing_ Try To Boost Output." The(Baltimore) Sun, Oct. 19, 1983.

3

PA will help many companies to producebetter and cheaper. But whether the policygoal is to improve industrial competitiveness,maximize employment, or both, OTA's re-search reveals a need for Comprehensive re-thinking of manufacturing processes and com-petitive Strategies. With surprisingconsisten-cy, automation experts consulted by O'TAcited organizational factors, rather thantechnical ones, as the principal problems sur-rounding the use of PA. Thus, iri several cases,PA feasibility studies hdve led to improve--ments in product design and production pros=eSses without the adoption of PA equipment.While new technologyi.e., new ways to corn-bine equipment, personnel, and materials=canhelp manufacturing companies, experiences inthe United States and abroad reveal that thesuccess or failure of PA depends more on themanagement characteristica of the organiza-tions that use it than on the particular choiceof :equipment and systems.

The technological, social, and economic con-cerns surrounding the spread of wogrammabltautomation are interconnected. Labor-savingtechnology does not necessarily cause unem-ployment: employment depends on what andhow much consumers will buy, as well as howmanagement decides _to m_ ake those goods.Technology does not of itself raise or lower theskill levels required of employees: skill require-ments depend on how management definesjobs and allocates work to suit an existing orpreferred work force. Machines do not neces-sarily improve or degrade the work environ-ment: equipment designers and managersinIke choices that determine how machine-s-and people interact.

Programmable automation can improve thework environment, raise productivity, and createor preserve at least some jobs if it is developedand apPlied with those goals in mind. Becausethe markets for PA are still young and the useof PA is still relatively limited, the near-termsocial and economic effects of PA will not becataclysmic. There is time for managers, ern-ployeeS, educators, and government to gain a

Ch. 2 Introduction 27

better understanding of PA and to plan to ad-dress the effects of automation on the work-place. Such advance planning will be necessaryin order for the country to capture the poten-tial benefits of PA and avoid excessive socialand economic costs. Specific areas where long-range planning would be beneficial include

analysis 9f changing skill requirements, im-provements on the pairings of people withmachines, and the roles and requirements forvarious educational institutions. Also impor-tant is the business climate for PA vendorsand users.

Study Approach, Organization, and MethodologyApproach

To appreciate what programmable automa-tion,bodes for the U.S. economy, it is neces-sary to understand its key features, includingits limitations and side effects as well as itsexpected benefits. This report examines thosefeatures largely from the perspective of thedividual firm that may adopt PA. It focuseson the use of PA among discrete-product man-ufacturers,* particularly those in such metal-working industries as transportation equip-ment and electrical and nonelectrical machin-ery. These industries have been and willthrough this century continue to be leadingusers of PA. While many of the conclusionsreached about the application of PA in metal-working industries may hold for other indu&tries; generalizing about long-term effects ofPA across industrieseven among metalwork-ing industriesis risky.

Where uncertainties exist, they are iden-tified. Often, those uncertainties surroundestimates of the amounts of change that arelikely to arise from the spread of PA. The re-liability of inferences about quantitative ef.fects on industries; regions; and the nationaleconomy is limited because good data on eco-nomic and social aspects of PA do not exist.In particular; there is a scarcity of good datadescribing shifts in skill requirements, typesof jobs; materials requirements, or the struc-ture_ and competitive conduct of industriesproducing and using programmable automa-

Producers of discrete produCts made in lots ranging fromone to mass-production quantity, such as industrial machinesand automobiles, as opposed to continuousprocess manufac-turers, such as producers of chemicals and steel.

tion. Consequently, it is too early to makeprecise; quantitative forecasts. Moreover,bedause technology, industrY, and job charac-teristics are changing continually, descriptionsof conditions at any one point will not neces-sarily hold up over time. This report thereforestresses the identification of the nature anddirection of likely changes rather than theirmagnitudes.

This report examines 'a wide range of potenntial changes in the development And use ofhuman. resources that may accompany the.spread of PA. Some will shape industry em-ployment prospects, others will affect thework environment. Indeed, potential changesin the work environment will Ultimately Wedmore people than changes in industry employ-ment levels. While developments in employ-ment and in the Work environment may mo-tivate new education and training activities,education and training in turn may shape thedevelopment, use, and employment effects ofPA. In describing the ramifications of pro-grammable automation for human resources,this report addresses the potential for nontech-nological factors; from management style toindustrial structure,/ to 'reinforce or .conflictwith the influences Of PA itself.

The international context for PA develop-ment and use is highlighted throughout thereport. While data on activities and programsabroad are limited and uneven in quality; eachchapter relates phenoinena in the UnitedStates to those abroad `to the extent feasible;Actions in many counties will affect the levelof technological development, the strength ofthe United States' claim to technological lead-

33

28 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education; and the Workplace

ership, and the ability of producers and usersof PA to compete in domestic and foreignmarkets.

Organization and MethodologyFollowing the executive summary and intro-

duction, the prospects for programmable auto-mation are examined in this report from sev-eral perspectives. Those perspectives arebrought out through seven analytical anddescriptive chapters. A final chapter presentscongressional policy options. Each chapterdraws on other chapters m the report, but isotherwise self-contained.

Chapter 3 addresses the questions. "Whatis programmable automation?" and "Flowmight it be used?" It defines PA technolo-giesincluding computer-aided design, robotsand other forms of computer-aided manufac-turing, and related computer-based rnanage-ment systemsand describes their develop-ment trends. This chapter stresses the factthat PA is much bigger than robotica, whichreceives most of the attention, and it evaluatesthe potential for the integration of PA equip-ment into highly automated systems.

_Chapters 4, 5, and 6 address the question,"_What are the implications of its use?"Chapter 4 examines the prospects for employ-ment change, including the ways in which PAmay influence job desigii and the number andmix of jobs among firms and industries. It alsohighlights conflicting influences on employ-ment by occupation and industry. Chapter 5explores the implications of the use of PA forthe workplace. The chapter shows how tech-nological features combine with managementattitudes and actions to shape the work en-vironment in manufacturing firms. Chapter 6illuminates emerging needS for education,training, and retraining and diScusses currentefforts by industry, labor, and the academic

39

community to meet those needs. It also dis-cusses the relationship between PA-relatedskills development and broader educationalpreparation.

Chapter 7 addresses the questions, "Whoproduces PA equipment?" and "What is thestatus of producer industries?" It describesthe structure and competitive conduct of in-dustries supplying programmable automationgoods and services. The chapter also charac-terizes the emerging role of these industriesin the U.S. and world economies.

Chapters 8 and 9 provide background on theplayers involved and on existing directions inU.S. and foreign technology policy. Chapter8 describes the roles ofpublic and private in-stitutions conducting PA research andBevel-opment. Chapter 9 enumerates the efforts ofgovernments in other countries to stimulatethe production and use of programmable auto-mation. These two chapters lead into chapter10, which provides alternatives for-congres-,sional action.

The findingS and insights of this report weredeveloped from many sources of information.Technical literature and conference sessionsprovided background materials, but more di-rect development of information constitutedthe bulk of the research. Over the course ofthe study, OTA held workshops that broughttogether experts in the areas of employmentchange and industrial relations,programmableautomation industries, and programmableautomation teclmoloees. OTA also conducteda survey of education, training, and retrain-ing activities and opinions among producersand users of PA and among educators. In ad-dition, 18 case studies were carried out. Four-teen described approachea to education, train-ing, or retraining-, four described some of theeffects of PA on the work environment.Throughout the study, OTA sthff visited fa-cilities and consulted with a wide range ofexperts.

Ch. 2Introduction 29

Congressional Interest and PolicyThe computerized manufacturing automa-

tion study was requested by the Joint Eco-nomic Committee ;the Senate Committe_e onLabor and Human Resources; the Senate Com-mittee on Commerce, Science, and Transpor-tation, ansi the Labor Standards Subcommit-tee of the House Committee on Education and

Labor. Other committees, including the Housecommittee on ScienCe and Technology and theHouse Committee on Small Business, havealso expressed interest in this study. Table 4lists several relevant congressional hearingsheld during the develOpment and conduct ofthis assessment.

Table 4.Representative Recent Congressional Hearings Relevant to Programmable Automation

RoboticsJune 2 and 23; 1982* 97th Congo 2d sess:Hearings before the Subcommittee on Investigations andOversight to examine the status and potential applicationsof robotics technology R&D.

New Technology In _the American WorkplaceJune 23, 1982; 97th_ Cong., 2d sess:Hearing before the Subcommittee on Labor Standards toexamine the impact of automation on employment andworking conditions.

Hearings -on _Mathematics_ and Science EducationSept. 28 -30, -1982, 97th Cong., 2d sess.; and Jan: 26.28 and31, 1983, 98th Cong., It sess.Hearings before the Subcommittee on Elementary, Sec-ondary, and Vocational Education and the Subcommitteeon Postsecondary Education to consider several bills toimprove mathematics and science education at theelementary and secondary level.

Oversight of Trade Adjustment Assistance Programsand Authorization of Appropriations for U.S. TradeRepresentative; International Trade Commission;and Customs Service

Mar. 17, 1983, 98th Cong., 1st sess.Hearings before the Subcommittee on International Tradeto consider the impacts of foreign trade and the fiscal year1984 activities of concerned Federal agencies:

Impact of Robotics on EmploymentMar. 18, 1983,_ 98th Corig., 1st sess.Hearing before the Subcommittee on Economic Goals andIntergovernmental Policy to examine th_e impact ofautomation, including robotics, on U.S._ employment.

Biological Clocks and Shift Work SchedulingMar. 23 and 24,_ 1983, 98th Cong., 1st sess.Hearings before the Subcommittee on Investigations andOversight to examine research on human biologicalrhythms, such as the sleep-wake cycle, and their effecton _lob performance of shift workers.

Job_ ForecastingApr: 6 and 7; 1983; 98th Cong., 1st s_ess.Hearings befere the Subcommittee on Investigations andOvefsight to examine implications of technology changefor employment forecasting.

The impact of Rbbots and Computers on the WorkfIce inthe 1980's

May 17, 1983, 98th Cong., 1st sess.Hearing before the Subcommittee on General Oversightand_ the Economy on employMent forecasting and tech-nological change.

Administration Proposal for Block Grant for Vocationaland Adult Education

May 19_, 1983,_ 98th Cong,_1st sess.Hearings before the Subcommittee on Elementary; Sec-ondary; and Vocational Education regarding the formula-tion and administration of Feder I education grants toStates.

Technology and Employment__-June 7.10, 14.16, and 23; 1983, 981 Cong. 1st sess.Joint hearings before the Subcommittee on Science;Research, and Technology and the Task Force on Educa-tion and Employment regarding the range of effects of newtechnoloV on labor.

Industrial Policy; Economic Growth and the Competitivenessof U.S. Industry

June 24, 29, and 30; and July 13, 14, and 20, 1983, 98thCong, 1st sess.Hearings to examine issues and recommendations relat-ing to a national industrial policy to ,facilitate industrycapital formation in order to promote and sustain econom-ic growth.

Joint Hearing on Plant ClosingJuly 8, 1983; 98th Cong., 1st sess.Joint hearing before the Subcommittee on EmploymentOpportunities and the Subcommittee on Labor-Manage-ment Relations of the Committee on Education and Laborre_garding a bill to set conditions on plant closin_gs.

Industrial Policy: the Retraining Needs of the Nation's Long-term, Structurally_ Unemployed Workers -

Sept. 16, 23, 26, and Oct. 26, 1983, 98th Cong., 1st sess.Hearings before the Joint Economic Committee on nation-al retraining needs associatediwith structural change inthe economy.

SOURCE- Office of Technology Assessment.

30 Computerized Manufachiring Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

The extensive congressional interest in thestudy reflects the fact that programMableautomation has numerous implications forpolicy. Recent policy discussions have tendedto focus on either labor issues or internationalcompetitiveness. Indeed, concern for laborissues was a strong theme in the requests forthe study.

This report addresses policy concerns in theareas of work environment, employment, edu-

cation and training, and the development anduse of programmable automation. Moreover,the policy discussion in chapter 10 emphasizesthe interconnections between impacts and pol-icies in all of those areas. It provides alter-natives for congressional action that addressthose areas` together as well as individually.

Chapter 3

Programmable AutomationTechnologies

ContentsPage

SummaiY 33

lritroduCtion 34

Discrete Manufacturing 35

The Manufacturing Process 37

Funetional Descriptions 43

Computer-Aided Design (CAD) 43

Computer-Aided Manufacturing }CAM) TeehnologieS 48Programmable Automation and ManufaCtUring Management . 69

Technical Trends and Barriers Future Applications 74

Trends and Barriers in -Five Technologies 74

Technical Trends and Barriers: CrOSS=Ctitting Issues 83

Future of the Technologies 93

Capabilities 93Future Levels of Use of Programmable Automation 97

Tablesmbie No.

Page

5. Principal Programmable Automation Techniques 35

6. Operating Robot Installations, End of 1982 52

7. EXamples of Current Robot Applications 54

8. Estimated Total Machine Tools in the United States 59

9 Age of Machine Tools in Seven Industrial NatitinS 61

10. Machine Tool Task Force Recommendation§ for Improving MachineTool Controls 80

11 CAD: Projections for Solution of Key ProblemS 94

12 Robotics: Projections for Solution of Key Problems 95

13. NC Machine Tools: ProjectiOnS for SOlution of Key Problems 95

14. FMS: Projections for Sdlution of Key Problems 9615. CIM: Projections for Solution of Key Problems 96

FiguresFigure Na;

Page

I= Characteristics of MetalWorking Production; By Lot Size 362 Organizational Diagrain of a Manufacturing Firm 38

3. Steps in the Manufacturing Process 39

4. Fundamental OperationS in Metalworking 40

5. SamPle Robot Grippers ', 51

6. Actual and Projected U.S: Annual Robot Sale§ and Installed BaseThrough 1992 53

7 Sample APT Computer Program 58

8. Total Number of Numerically Conti-Oiled Machine Toolsin U.S. Metalworking 59

9 Programmable Automation FactOry Hierarchy 7310. NBS Scheme for Distributed FactoryControl 83

11. Sample Rule from the MYCIN Expert System 85

12. Sample "Advice" Froth the MYCIN Expert System 86

13; Machdne Vision Process 92

Chapter 3

1 Programmable Automation Technologies /

SummaryThis chapter is both a priPler OP Prokratn-

rnable automation (PA) toolo end 'Weir Poten-tial applications in manufacpainA, and_ am as-sessment of the important problems and direc-tions for development of the technologies. As

/defined here; programmabla ttutvfoation in-cludes computer-aided design (CAM; comput-er -aided manufacturing toolses4,-, robotics;numerically controlled (NO /1124ftta_e tools,flexible manufacturing sysoenis (rgs), andautomated materials handling (AA10H); andcomputer-aided techniques fChr Intaitigerilette;g4 management information syotOrls MIS)and computer-aided _planniftg (QAP) Whensystems for design, manufaottltibg, and ruen=agement are used together in a noordluatedsystem. the result is conawter,integratedmainufaCtUring (CIM).

..The context for this analrgis iv Prunarilydiscrete manufacturing, as opposecl to contin-uous-process industries sucl,A as ohernicals orpaper. Discrete manufaCturibg inokiae$ a widerange of traditional metalworking padustries(e.g., automobiles and farm edit:3410W as wellas other industries which kre no Primarilymetalworking (e.g., electronigs).note is that a great many of the products ofdiscrete manufacturing are Aradof perhaps a few dozen to a fe'w litmdred traits.Because of this; it is often nob ecanoraleal touse single-purpose, autoroated Machines(known as "fixed" or "hard' Atitolnation) tomanufacture the product. In such OA qnviron-ment, programmable automation i votentiellyvery useful.

The essential difference Itewttll convet-tienial factory machines anti pmtfraturuableautomation is the latter's u .of itjiorrnationtechnology to provide macliLine on.treol andcommunication. The use of coroptltera ancommunications systems atioqvg these rn

chines to perform a greater variety of tasksthan fixed automation can perform, and toautomate some tasks which previously neces-sitated direct human control.

Programmable automation can respond tosome of the central problems of manufactur-ing. These include enhancing information flow,improving coordination;, and increasing effi-ciency and flexibility (defined as both therange of products and volume of a specificproduct which a factory can economically pro-duce). By using programmable automation toaddress these problems, manufacturers hopeto increase their productivity and control overthe manufacturing process.

Though labor savings seem to be the mostobvious benefit of automation, savings_ throughmore efficient use of materials may be moresignificant in many manufacturing environ-ments. In particular, flexible manufacturingsystems can reduce waste, reduce levels offinished product inventory, and reduce themanufacturer's substantial investment in theproducts that are in various stages of comple-tion, known as "work in process."

Some of the technical factors which holdback PA's potential uses in manufacturinginclude relatively cumbersome programinglanguages, a general level of technical imma-turity in many areas of the technologies, long-established organizatidnalbarriers in industry(e.g., between manufacturing and design en-gineers), and the embryonic nature of effortato maximize the effectiveness of man-machineinteractions.

Nevertheless, the technologies appear to bequite adequate technically. for the vast majori-ty of near-term applications; there seems tobe a significant backlog of available toolswhich manufacturers have only begun toexploit.

33

34 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

The use of PA tools in integrated systemse.g., FMS or CIMis much more powerfulthan their use for a single task _or process:Such integration not only magnifiea the pro-ductivity and efficiency benefita of PA, butalso tends to induce changes in all parts of thefactory. Management strategies, product de-signs, and materials flow all change to bestmake use of such integrated systems.

Many industrialists have a vision of CIMthat includes maximum use of PAtools andcoordination between them, with few if anyhuman workers. Others downplay CIM as arevolutionary change and emphasize that fac-tories will adopt automation technologies asappropriate. It may not be appropriate (or eco-nomical) to remove all or most humans frommany factories. In any case, the widespreaduse of CIM and virtually unmanned factories

are unlikely to arise before the turn of thecentury.

Principal themes in the future developmentof PA technologies include increasing theirversatility and power, enhancing their capa-bility to operate without human intervention,and developing the ability, lof the tools to beintegrated. Researchers and industry spokes-men report progress in virtually all the fun-damental technical areas; although many ofthe currently identified problems in program-mable automation are complex enough to keepresearchers busy for many years to come. Ac-cording to many experts, the 19%0's may bringmany major technical advances_which couldsignificantly expand the range of problems towhich programmable automation can be.ErbOlied.

IntroductionThe puilicise of _this chapter is to describe

the technologies that together comprise "pro-grammable_autOmation," and to evaluate theirusefulness for manufacturing. In addition; thechapter examines how the technologies areevolving and what can be expected for the ca-pabilities and applications of these tools.

Programmable automation refers to a familyOf technologies that he at the intersection ofcomputer science and manufacturing engineer-ing. "Programmable" means that they can beswitched from one task to another with rela-tive ease by changing the (usually) computer-ized instructions; "automation" implies thatthey perform a significant part of their funs=tions without direct human intervention. Thecommon element in these tools that makesthem different from traditional manufaCturingtools is their use of the computer to_rnatiipti=late and store data; and the use of relatedmicroelectronics technology to allow commu-

nication of data to other machines hi thefactory.*

There are three general categories of func-tions which these tools performthey are usedto help design products; to help manufacture(both fabricate and assemble) products on thefactory floor; and to assist in management ofmany factory operations. Table 5 outlinea theprincipatechnologies included in these cate-gories; each of which will be described in thenext section.

*Although "prolgammable automation" is less common thansome of the other terms used to describe automation teChnolo-gieS, it is relaUvaraimple_and unambiguous term for the toblidiscussed here, "CAD/CAM" (computer-aided design/computeraided manufacturing) is a catch -all term used in Industry jour-nals and popular-articles to-refer to a-set of technologies simtu-to the stt defined here as programmableautomation. Hoiretter,CAD/CAM is ago used to describe some specific computer-aideddesign systems, or to denote the integration of computer-aideddesign and intmufaCtiiiiiig. Because -of this ambiguity; the termwill not be used here. "Robotics" is another term that issometimes used in a broad sense to mean not only robots butthe whole family of automation tools.

Ch. 3Programmable Automation Technologies 35

'Table 5. Principal ProgrammableAutomation Technologies

I. Computer-aided design (CAD)A. Computei--aided draftingB. Computer-aided engineering (CAE)

11. Computer-aided manufacturing (CAM)A. RobotsB. NOmerically controlled (NC) machine _toolsC. Flexible manufacturing systems_ (EMS)D. Automated materials handling (AMH) and

automated storage and retrieval Systems (AS/PS)III. Tools and strategies for manufacturing management

A. Computer-Integrated manufacturing (CiM)B. Management information systems (MIS)C. Computer-aided planning1CAP) and computer-

aidedlprocess planning (CAPP)NOTE: Bold type Indicates technologies on which this report concentrates.

SOURCE: Office of Technology Assessment.

The three categories of automation technol-ogiestools for design, manufacturing, andmanagementare not mutually exclusive. In

fact, the goal of much current researchin auto-!nation systems is to break down the barriersbetween them so that design and manufactur-ing systems are inextricably linked. However,these three categories are useful to frame thediscussion, particularly since they.correspondto the organization of a typical manufactur-ing firm.

Further, this report does not attempt tocover each of the technologies in equal detail.It concentrates on those five which appear inbold type in table 5 b&ause they are the coretachnologies of PA and their potential uses aremost extensive.

Discrete ManufacturingSome background about manufacturing is

important to provide a context for assessingthe usefulness of these tools. Programmableautomation can affect many kinds of industry.This reportiocuses on PA applications for dis-crete manufacturingthe design, manufactureand assembly of products ranging from boltsto aircraft. The report does not systematicallycover nonmanufacturing applications such asarchitecture, or continuous-process manufac-turinge.g., chemicals, paper, and steel. Otherrecent OTA reports haVe examined technolog-ical changes affecting process industries.'

Electronics manufacturing industries do notfit neatly into a discrete v. process classifica-tion. Some areas, particularly the fabricationof semiconductors, most resemble -Aontinuous-process manufacturing. Other portions suchas circuit board assembly are more discrete.

'Cf. U.S. Industrial Competitiveness: A Comparison of Steel,Electronics, and Autornobile (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Con-gress, Office of Technology_ Assessment, OT-A-ISOA35July1982); Technology and Steel Industry_ Competitiveness(Washington, D.C.: U .S. Congress, Office of Technology Assess-ment, OTA-M-122, June 1980).

Because electronics industries have been lead-ers among metalworking firins in both produc-ing and using computerized factory automa-tion, they play a key role in this report.

To many industrialists; diicrete manufac-turing means Metalworking for mechanical ap-plicationsshaping; forming; and finishingmetals into usable products such as engineblocks; However; an increasing proportion ofmechanical parts manufacturing involves pl*:,tics fiber composites; or_new, durable cereiriilics; These new materials both enable new pro-duction processes and are themselves affCttklby automation technologies.

One way in which discrete manufacturingplants can be categorized that is especially rel-evant to automation applications is the vol-ume of a given part that,they produce; As fig-ure 1 indicates; discrete manufacturing repre-sents a continuum from piece or custom pro-duction of a single part to mass production ofmanythousands, Although many people' aremost familiar with thass-pr6duction factories,with their assembly and transfer lines, it isestimated that mass prilduction accounts foronly 20 percent of metalworking parts pro-

46

36 COmputerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the WOrkplace

1000,0

0%

Figure 1.Characteristics of Metidworking Production; By Lot Size

Type Ofproduction:

Piete

Highestimate

Lowestimate

Batch Mass

Largecomplexoart

Smallsimplepart

Typicalproducts

Typicalmachines

1-10

1-300

10-300

300-15,000

Aircraft. Marine engineslarge la-rge electricturbines motors,centrifuges tractors

rciahual machine NE_ machine toolstools, or stand- with automated part-alone numerically handlingcontrolled _(NC) machining. cellmachine tools flexible

manufacturingsystem

SOURCE Machine Tool Task Force, Technology of MAChme Tools. October 1980.

4

Over 200

Over 10,000

Autos,fastener%smallappliances

Transfer lines,dedicated orspecial machines

Ch. 3Programmable Automation Technologies 37

duced in the United States, while 75 percentare made in a "batch" environment.2 The def-inition of a "batch" varies according to thecomplexity of the part and the characteristicsof the industry. A common characteristic ofbatch manufacturing is that there is notenough volume to justify specialized machines(known as "hard automation") to automatical-ly produce the part; The direct labor involvedin fabricating products in batChes is relative-ly high (as shown in-fig; 1), and constitutes alarge proportion of the cost of the item. Thesecharacteristics of batch manufacturingitsprevalence; and its low level of automation andcorrespondingly high level of labor contentare important because they suggest a broadrange of uses for programmable automation.

The ManufacttuAng ProcessFigure 2 illustrates the organization of a

hypothetical metalworking manufacturingplant: Most of the elements in this diagramare present in some form in each plant, al-though factories are tremendously varied insize; nature and variety of products, and pro-duction technologies. One automobile factoryin New Jersey, for example, assembles 1,000cars per day in two models (sedan and wagon)With 4,000 employees; a small Connecticut ma-chine shop, by contrast, employs 10 people tomake hundreds of different metal parts foraircraft and medical equipment, typically inbatches of approximately 250.3

As illustrated in figure 3, the manufactur-ing process usually begins when managementdecides to make a new product based on in-formation from its marketing staff, or (in thecase of the many factories whichproduce partsof other companies' products) management re-ceives a contract to produce a certain part.

'M. E. Merchant. "The Inexorable Push for Automated Pro-duction." Production Engineering, January 1977_,pp. 44.49.This 75 percent figure has become something of a legend in themetalworking industry largely through Merchant's writings,though he notes that he has lost track of the original referencefor the statistic. While it is hard to substantiate given the di:versity of metalworking industry. Merchant and other industryexperts cite it as a good rough estlinate. Personal cora/mince.tion. M. E. Merchant, Nov. 7. 1983,

'OTA work environment case studies.

Management sends the specifications for thesize, shape; function, and desired performanceof the product to its design engineering staff,who are responsible for.developing the_ plansfor the product.* In most companies, designengineers make a rough drawing of the prod-uct, and then draftsmen and design detailersare responsible for working out the detailedshapes and specifications.

In some discrete manufacturing firms; de-sign may be undertaken at a distanelocation,or at a different firm. Automobiles, for exam-ple, are iksigned at central facilities, and thecomponent subassembliese.g., bodies, trans-missions, enginesare produced in plants allover the world:

The design of a pr6duct, especially a productof some complexity; involves an intricate setof tradeoffs between marketing considera-tions, materials and manufacturing costs, andthe capabilities and strengths of the company.The number of choices involved in design isimmense. Determining which of many alter-native designs is "best" involves makingchoices among perhaps 100;000 different ma-terials, each with different characteristics ofstrength, cost, and appearance; it also involveschoices between different shapes and arrange-ments of parts which will differ in ease offabrication and assembly (sometimes called"manufacturability") and in performance.

From the design, the production engineer-ing staff determines the "process plan"ma-chines, staff; and materials which will be usedto make the product. Production planning; likedesign, involves a set of complex choices. Inamass production plant that manufacturesonly a few products, such as the auto plant de-scribed above; production engineering is a rel-atively well-structured problem. With highvolumes and fairly reliable expectations aboutthe products to be made, decisions about ap-propriate levels of automation, for example,

*In this description, as in the rest of the chaPter, titles suchas "manager," "design engineer," Or "draftsman" indicate theperson who 127ae firms these functions. In an actual company theroles maybe less distinct; and boundaries between them fre-quently changing.

38 Computerized Manufacturing AiitdrilatiOn: Employment; Education; and the Workplace

Figure.2.Organizational Diagram of a Manufacturing Firm

at4-,PPPOsPi,P13

SOURCE. Office of Technology Assessment.

Marketing/management

7-4---73esign constraintsM

Ch. 3Programmable Automation Technologies 39

Figure 3.Steps in the Manufacturing Process (Simplified)Product

ideas andneeds

Design

Process plans

Rough-

design

Design detaildrafting

Blueprints ManufaCturing/engineering

Inventory

Finished part

hmatenals Materialshandling

Materials

FabricationRough

_Repetitive fabricationsteps

partFinishing

110- Quality Inspected_control part

ubassemblies

Assembly

SOOFCE 4ce Inchnology Assessment

Finished

product

are relatively straightforward. On the otherhand, for a small "batch" manufacturer suchas the Connecticut machine shop referred toabove, production engineering decisions canbe rather chaotic. Such an environment in-volves almost continuous change in the num-ber and types of parts being produced (size;shape, finish, material), the tools and levels ofskill needed to produce them; and =predict-ables such as machine breakdowns and inven-tory control problems.

The steps in production are immensely var-ied, but most products typically require thefollowing:

1. Materials handling. Materials arebrought from inventory to processing sta-tions, and from one station to another.Wheeled carts, forklift trucks, or convey-ors are typically used for this purpose.Early in the production process; largeparts are mounted on a pallet or fixture

25-452 - 84 - 4 : QL 3

IiiVeritOry...,or

shipping

to hold them in place and facilitate ma-terials handling.

2. Fabrication.There is a tremendous vari-ety of fabrication processes. Plastic andceramic parts are extruded or molded; lay-ers of composite fiber material are treatedand "laid up.'.' The most common se-quence for three-dimengional_(3-D) metalparts is casting or forging, followed bymachining.

Figure 4 illustrates the basic machin-ing processes which are the core of metal-working. The shape and size of the metalpart, as well as the desired finish and pre-cision, determines the machine to be used.Some machine tools, such as lathes, aredesigned for cylindrical parts, e.g., driveshafts or rotors. Others, such as planers,are designed for prismatic parts with ba-sically flat outer surfaces, e.g., engineblocks. Abrasive cutting of metal pro-duces "chips," the metal shavings re-

40 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

Figure 4.Fundamental Operations in MetaIWOrking

Al The four basic machining processes Can, between them; theoretically [B] In anyof the batit machining processes; speed, feed,

produce any contour on a workpiece.lthough the processes are old, they and depth of cut determine productivity. The tee variables

are the foundation of metalworking and are being made more produc are shown here for turning on a lathe.

tive and accurate.

Sheet metal bending

Push

fcitce

Fig, C

SOURCE M P Groover, Fundamental Operations:. IEEE Spectrum. vol. 20. Na 5. May 1983

51

IC] Forming operations bend,squeo2e, or stretch metal;imparting new sizes or shapes,or both.

[D] Shearing deforms metalbeyond its breaking point.thereby separating one por-tion of a metal sheet from an-other.

Reprinted with permission of IEEE Spectrum. 'c.igEE

Ch. 3Programmable Automatiori Techholegiea 41

moved from the part, and these chipsmust be frequently removed from the ma-chine and recycled or disposed;

Simple parts may be machined in a fewminutes; large; complex ones such as shippropellers may take up to a few days. Thecomplexity of these parts is primarily afunction of their geometrya propeller,for example; has continuously Varyingand precise curves. Similarly, the coin;plexity of a prismatic part depends on thenumber of edges and required tolerances

the amount part or Surface canvary from its specified dimensions. Com-plex parts usually require machining onmore than One machine tool. Including allmachining operations, the total time frommetal "blank" to finished part may varyfrom a few minutes to a few weeks: Thepartially completed "workpieces" await-ing further machining, finishing; assem-bly, or testing are known as work-in-proc-ess inventories, and often represent asubstantial investment for the manu-facturer.

Finally; there are several kindsOf Metalparts which are not machined. TheSeelude sheet metal parts, Whitt' arestamped and/or bent in Sheet=nietalpresses; and parts made by "powder met-

. allurgy," a technology for fOrining metalparts in near-final Shape by applying ex-treme pressure and heat to metal powder.

3. Finishing. Many- fabriegtion processesleave "burrs" on the part which must beremoved by subsequent operations; Insome cases, parts are also washed;painted, polished, or coated.

4. Assembly. The finished parts are puttogether to produce a final product Or, al=ternatively, to produce subasSemblieS"which are portions of the Rita Product.In most factories assembly is Still tUiiiiari=ly a manual activity, although this phaseof manufacturing is receiving increasedattention, ranging from design Strategiesthat minimize and simplify assemblytasks to automation of the tasks them-selVeS.

5. Quality assurance and control. -- -There are rmany quality strategies. They can be di-vided roughly into those that take placebefore or during fabrication and assembly(quality assurance or QA) and those thattake place after a product or subassemblyis complete (quality control or QC). Quali-ty has been receiving increasing attentionin industrial literature and discussions, al-though the extent to which companies areactually paying more attention to quali-ty on the factory floor is uncertain. Thereappears to be a movement toward QA asopposed to QC in order to enhance quali-ty and prevent the production of faultyproducts, as opposed to detecting flawsafter production. Strategies for QA rangefrom "quality circles," in which a team ofemployees helps address production is-sues which affect quality, to in processmeasurement of products as they aremanufactured. In the latter, developingproblems in production equipment cansometimes be detected and corrected be-fore the machine makes a bad_part. Mostcomplex products are produced with somecombination of QA and QC.

Strategies for attaining the more tradi-tional quality control vary widely accord-ing to the nature and complexity of thepart. The dimensions of mechanical prod-ucts can be Tneasured, either with manualinstruments or with a Coordinate Measur-ing Machine or laser measurement device;or product can be compared to one ofknown quality or to a master gage. Elec-tronic products can be tested with otherelectronic devices or probes.

This brief outline of the manufacturing pros=ess suggests some of the key problem§ in man-ufacturing. Underlying each of these problemsare the central concerns for any business,those of minimizing cost and risk. The prob-lems include:

Information flow In any company,small or large, the amount ofinformationthat must flow between and among dW-sign, manufacturing, and management

42 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

staff is staggering. For example, in adesign process involving several teams ofpeople; how does one make sure that alldesign and manufacturing personnel areworking from the most up4o-date set ofplans? How can staff get up4o-date infor-!nation on the status of a particular batchof parts, or the perforinance of a particu-lar machine tool or manufacturing depart -'ruent? How can the company keep trackof work=in4:rOce88 and other inventory?Coordination.Beyond merely obtaininginformation in a timely fashion, the com-pany must use that information to deter-mine how to effectively coordinate itsoperations. One set of such issues in-volves coordination of design and produc-tion efforts. How can one design productswhich can be manufactured most effi-ciently with a given set of tools? How canone minimize the number of parts in orderto facilitate assembly? Another_ set ofcoordination issues arises on the factoryfloor itself. What is the most efficient wayto allocate machines and personnel? Howdoes one adapt the schedule when condi-tions inevitably change (raw materialsdon't arrive; production is slower than ex-pected, etc.)?E fficiency. Given a large set of choicesregarding tools, personnel, and factory or-,ganization, a company generally seeks tomake the most products using the fewestresources. This involves concerns suchHow can the company minimize expen-sive work-in-process inventories? Howcan manufacturers maximize the percent-

= age of time spent making parts, as op-posed to moving them, repairing_ or set-ting up machines, and planning? How canthe use of expensive capital equipment bemaximized? Finally, quality issues with-in the production protesS can have a largeimpact on efficiency. How can manufac-turers maximize the number of productsmade right the first time, and hence min-imize scrap, rework to correct manufac-turing errors, and testing?

Flexibility. =Increasingly, issues of flex-ibility and responsiveness in the-manufac-turing enterprise are prominent for man-ufacturers, especially for traditional"mass production" plants. Flexibility isdefined here as the range of products andthe range of volumes of a specific productwhich a plant can economically produce.Increased levels of competition, shorterproduct cycles; and increased demands forcustomized products are some of the rea-sons for an emphasis on flexibility. ThiSconcern raises such questions as: How canthe turnaround time for design and man-ufacture of a product be reduced? Howcan the "setup" time for prciducing a newproduct be reduced? What is the optimumlevel of technology for both economy ofproduction and maximum flexibility?

Programmable automation offers improve=merits in each of these foie key areas of man=ufaCturing by applying computerized tech=-tmopes to control tools of production, to gatherand maniPulate information about the manu-facturing_process, and to design and plan thatprocess. Further, the use of PA promises formany-manufacturers an increase in their de-gree of control over the enterprise. Many in-dustrialiSts argue that the more closely.man-ufacturing processes are tied to one another,and the more information is readily availableabout those processes, the less chance thereis for human error or discretion to introduceunknown elements, into the operation. Suchcontrol is much harder to realize than it ap-pears in theory. The issue of control will be arecurrent theme in this and subsequent chap-ters of this report.

1In summary, programmable automation canhelp make factories "leaner" and more respon-sive, hence reducing both costs and risks inmanufacturing. It is not, however, a panaceafor problems in manufacturing. Each factoryhas different appropriate levels of automation;and there are technical and organizational bar-riers to implementing programmable automa-tion most effectively. PA's capabilities and

Ch. 3Programmable Automation Technologies 43

characteristics from a technical standpointwill be elaborated in the rest of this chapter,beginning with functional descriptions of the

technologies themselves. The organizationaland social concerns will be addressed at lengthin following chapters of the report.

Functional DescriptionsThis section briefly describes the operation

of each programmable automation technologyand its applications in manufacturing.

Computer-Aided Design (CAD)In its simpler forms, CAD is an electronic

drawing board for design engineers and drafts-men. Instead of drawing a detailed design withpencil and paper, these individuals work at acomputer terminal, instructing the computerto combine various lines and curves to producea drawing of a part and its specifications, Inits more complex forms, CAD can be used tocommunicate to manufacturing equipment thespecifications and process for making a prod-uct. Finally, CAD is also the core of computer-aided engineering, in which engineers can ana-

a,

Photo credit: Cincinnati Milacron Corp.

A designer works on a two-dimensional part drawingat a CAD terminal. The "light pen," held in his righthand, can be used to point to parts of the draWing and

give commands to the computer

lyze a design and maximize a product's per-formance using the computerized representa-tion of the product. /

The roots of computer-aided design technol-ogy are primarily in computer science. CADevolved from research carried out in the late1950's and early 1960's on interactive comput-er graphicssimply, the use of computerscreens to display and manipulate linen andshapes instead of numbers and text. As S. H.Chasen of Lockheed-Georgia describes the ra-tionale behind this research: "The ability ofthe computer to spill out reams of geometricdata had outpackl our ability to cope with it."'SKETCHPAD, funded by the Department ofDefense (DOD) and demonstrated at Massa-chusetts InStitute of Technology in 1963, wasa milestone in CAD development. Users coulddraw pictures on a screen and manipulatethem with a "light pen"a pen-shaped objectwired to the computer which locates points onthe screen. Such early systems were expensiveprototypes and required most of the comput-ing power of the then-largest computers. Asa consequence, most of the early users of CADwere aerospace, automobile, and electronicsmanufacturers.

Several key developments in the 1960's and1970'S facilitated the maturation of CAD tech-nology. They included the continuing decreasein cost of computing power, especially with thedevelopment of powerful mini- and microcom-puters, which were primarily a result of elec-tronics manufacturers learning to squeezemore and more circuitry into an integrated cir-cuit chip. Another important technological ad-vance was the development of cheaper, more

'S. H. Chae-en;_.I'HietoriciA Highlights of Interactive ComputerGraphics," itfichaniat Eiigineating November 1981; pp: 22.41,

54

44 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

efficient display "screens. In addition; comput7er Scientists began to develop very powerfulprograming techniques for manipulating com-puterized images.

Row CAD Works.--There are variousschemes for input of a design to the computersystem, each with its advantages and clisad-vantageS. Every CAD system is equippedwith .a keyboard, although other devices areOften more useful for entering and manipulat-_ink shapes. The operator can point to areas ofthe screen with a light pen or use a graphicstablet, which is an electronically touch-sensi-tive drawing board; a device called a "mouse"can be traced on an adjacent surface to movea pointer around on the screen. If there is al-ready a rough design or Model for the prod-uct, the operator can use a "digitizer" to readthe contours of the model into computer mem-ory, and then manipulate a drawing of themodel on the screen. Finally, if the part- issimilar to one that has already been designedusing the CAD system, the operator can recallthe old design from computer memory and editthe drawing on the screen.

CAD systems typically have a library ofstored shapes and commandS to facilitate theinput of designs. There are four basic functionsperformed by a CAD system which can en-hance the productivity of a designer ordrafts-man; Firsti CAD allOWS "replication," the abil-ity to take part of the image and use it in sev-eral other areas of the design when a producthas repetitive features. Second,the systemscan "translate" parts of the image from onelocation on the screen to another; Third is"scaling," in which CAD can "zoom in" on asmall part, or change the size or proportionsof one part. of the image in relatiOn to theothers. Finally, "rotation" allows the operatorto see the design from different angles or per-Spectives. Using such command§, operatorscan perform sophisticated manipulations ofthe drawing; some of which are difficult or im-possible to achieve with pencil and paper. Re-petitive designs; or design§ in which one partof the image is a small_ modification of a pre-vious drawing,_ean be done much more quick-ly through CAD. On the other hand, CAD can

be cumbersome, especially for inexperiencedusers. Drawing an unusual shape may be fairlystraightforward with a'pencil, but quite com-plex to accomplish using the baSid lines andcurves in the system's library. .

The simplest CAD systems are two-dimen-sional (2=D), like pencil-and-paper drawings.And like sets of those drawings; they can beused to model 3-D objects if several 2-D draw-ings from various perspectives are combined.For some applications, such as electronic cir-cuit design, 2-D drawings -aresufficient. Moresophisticated CAD syStems have been devel-oped in the past few year§ Which allow theoperator to construct a 3-D image on thescreen;* a capability WhiCh is particularly use-ful for complex mechanical products.

Most CAD systems includea few CAD ter-., minals connected to a central mainframe orminicomputer, although some recently devel-oped- system use stand-111one Microcomput-ers. As the operator produee§ a drawing, it isstored in computer memory, typically on amagnetic disk. The collection of digitizeddrawings in computer storage becomes a de-sign data base, and this data base is thenreadily accessible to other designers, manag-ers; or manufacturing staff.

CAD operators have several options for out-put of their design. All systems have a plot-ter, which is capable of Producing precise andoften multicolor paper copies of the drawing.Some systems can generate copies of the de-sign on microfilm or microfiche for compactstorage; Others are capable of generating pho-tographic output. In most cases, however; thepaper output frbin CAD is much less impor-tant than it is in manual design process.More important is the fact that the design isstored on,a COmpUter disk; it is this versionwhich is most up-to-date and accessible; and

*In _a practical sense, any image on a computer screen is two-dimensional. The difference btireen a "3-D" image as discussedhere and any other 2-D drawing that appears three-dimensional(e.g., a paintimg, a photograph or any drawing with perspec-tive) is that this image, unlike a paper drawing, can bemanipulated as if it were a real 3-D object. For example, theoperator can instruct the CAD system to rotate theobject, andhe/she then sees another face of the object.

ACe.

Ch. 3Programmable Automation Technologies 45

Illustration credit: Computervislop Corp.

The designer has removed a section of this threodimensional CAD image in order to better visualizepart relationships and assembly information

Which will be modified as design changesoccur.

The CAD systems described above are es-sentially draftsmen's versions of word proc-essors. allowing operators to create and easi-ly modify an electronic version of a drawing.However, more sophisticated CAD systemscan go beyond computer-aided drafting in twoimportant ways.

First, such systems increasingly allow thephysical dimensions of the product, and thesteps necessary to produce it, to be developedviathe computer and communicated electron=ically to computer-aided manufacturing equip-Ment. Some of these systems present a graphicsimulation of the machining process on the

4

Screen; and guide the operator step-by-step inplanning the machining process. The CADsystem can then produce a tape which is fedinto the machine tool controller and used toguide the machine tool path. Such connectionsfrom computer-aided design equipment tocomputer-aided manufacturing equipmentshortcut several steps in the conventionalmanufacturing process. They cut down thetime necessary for a manufacturing engineerto interpret design drawings and establishmachining plans; they facilitate process plan-ning by providing a visualization of the ma-chining process; and they reduce the time nec-essary for machinists to interpret processplans and guide the machine tool through theprocess.

46 Cbmputenzed Manufacturing Automation: Employalent, Education; and the Workplace

Second, these more sophisticated CAD sys-tems serve as the core technology fer manyforms of computer-aided engineering (CAE).Beyond using computer graphics merely tofacilitate drafting and &Sign changes, CAEtools permit interactive deSign and analysis.Engineers can, for example, use computergraphic techniques for aimulation and anima-tion of products, to visualize the operation ofa product or to obtain an estimate of its per-formanee. Other CAE programs can help en-gineers perform finite element analysis es-sentially, breaking down complex mechaniealobjects into a network of hundreds of simplerelements to determine stresses and deforma-tiona. Computerization in general made finiteelement analysis feasible for the engineer'suse, while CAD systems make it significant;ly le88 cumbersome by assisting the engineerin breaking down the object into "elements."

Many of these analytical functions are de-pendent on 3=D CAD systems which can notonly &Aviv the design but also perform "solidmodeling " i.e., the machine can.calctilate anddisplay Sikh. solid characteristics as the vol-ume and density of the object. So lid-mei:161h*capabilities are among the most complex fea=turea of CAD technology; and will be dis-cussed in more detail in later sections of thischapter.

Applications. At the end of 1983 therewere an estimated 32,000 CAD workstationsin the United States.6

Aerospace and electronics uses of CAD havealways led the state of the art. For example;the BOeing Commercial Airplane Co., whichbegan using CAD in the late 1950's, employedthe technology extensively in the design of itsnew- generation 757 and 767 aircraft. Boeinguses CAD to design families of similar partssuch as wing ribs and floor beams. CAD allowsdesigners to make full use of similaritiea be-tween parts so that redesign and redraftingare minimized. Moreover, CAD has greatlysimplified the task of designing airplane in-

"Source: Dataquest.

teriors and cargo compartments, which areoften different for each plane. Moving seats,galleys, and lavatories is relatively simple withCAD; and the system is then used to generateinstructions for the machines which later drilland assemble floor panels according to thelayout. Finally, Boeing uses CAD and relatedinteractive computer graphics systems as thebasis for computer-aided engineering applica-tions such as checking mechanisni clearpncesand simulating flight performance of variousparts and 8ystems.6

Computer-aided engineering has alao be-come important in the automobile and aero-space industries, where weight can be a criticalfactor in the design of products. These indus-tries have develoPed CAE prOgrams which canoptifnize a design for minimum material usedwhile maintaining strength.

Applications for the design of integrated cir-cuits are similarly advanced. Very large-scaleintegrated (VLSI) circuits, for example, havebecome so complicated that it is virtually im-

'W. D. Beeby, (former) Director of Engineering ComputingSystems, Boeing _Commercial Airplane Co., "Applications ofComputer-Aided Designon the 767" (Seattle: Boeing, 1983).

Step 10

Illustration cradle General Motors Corp.

A computer-alded_engineering system developed atGeneral Motors Research- Laboratories can helpdesigners develop parts Whibh are of minimum mass, _yet are capable_ of performing under the structuralloads. The CAE system_tries to make the part thinnerand lighter with each step; shading changes whichappear on the computer screen show simulated strew.

levels within the deSign limits for this part

Ch. 3Programmable Automation Technologies 47

possible for-a person to manually keep trackof the circuit paths and make sure the pattersare correct. There is less need here for geomet-rically sophisticated CAD systems (integratedcircuit designs are essentially a few layers_Oftwo-dimensional lines); and more needior com-puter -aided engineering systems to help thedesigner cope with the intricate arrangementof the circuit pattern. Such CAE programs areused to simulate the performance of a circuitand checkit for "faults,"_as well as to optimizethe use of space on the chip.'

CAD is also beginning to be used for non-aerospace mechanical design, and in smallerfirms; these developments are being spurredon by the marketing of relatively low-priced"turnkey" systemscomplete packages ofsoftware and hardware which, theciretically,are ready to use as soon as they are deliveredand installed. While a standard and reasonablypowerful system based on a minicomputer

TS: B. Newell, A. J. de Geus, and R. A. Rohrer, "Design Auto-mation for Integrated Chbuits," Science, Apr. 29, 1983, pp.465-471.

Photo credit: Computervision Corp.

CAD systems are used frequently In electronicsindustries to design and analyze

complex circuit patterns

typically hi the $500,000 range, many smallermicrocomputer= based systems have been in-troduced in the past year for under $100,000;in some cases for as low as $10,000 to $20;000;Very low-cost systems which run on commonmicrocomputers have been introduced, andthese have potential uses in a wide variety offirms which otherwise might not considerCAD (see ch. 7). The cost of custom-developed,specialized Systems such as those describedabove for aerospace and electronics applica-tions is harder to gauge but runs well into themillions of dollars:

The potential advantage of CAD for largeas well as smalLmechanicalLmanufacturingfirms is that it addresses several of the prob- ylems in manufacturing referred to at the begin-ning of this ,chapter. It facilitates use of pre-vious designs, and allows design changes tobe Processed more quickly; BecatiSe CAD re-duces the time necessary for many designtasks, it can also improve design-by allowingdesigners to "try out" a dozen or a hundreddifferent variations, where previously theymight have beeniiiiiited to building perhapsthree or four iiiii-Cotype models. It also allowsmany draivings_tb be constructed more quick-

especially with an experienced CAD oper-ator. Comparisons of design time with CADrange frOin 0.5 to 100 times as fast as manualsystems, .0.4h 2 to 6 times as fast being typi-Cal.* For tritce, Prototype and Plastic Mold

Mid etown, Conn., is a small firmthat ii es CAD to design short-lived metalmolds for plastic parts. The firm's presidentreported that designs could befiroduced withCAD roughly twice as fast a previously. Forexample, they received spepifications for aplastic part mold by air express one Saturdaymorning; and planned to return the design 7

drawings by air express that evening-7a featwhich; they reportedi worild have been impos;sible without CAD.** ;

*Many Of these estimates represent comparisons of the timenecessary for a very narrowly defined task. and exclude timenecessaty for related tasks on a CADflyertern such as setting,tip the made, manipulating fries, or recovering from a ma-chine failure.

*OTA Site visit, Protbtype and Plastic Mold Corp.; Mid-dletown, Conn., June 3,1983.One scientist has pointed out thatthe time savings would be even more striking if Prototype and

48 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

Other applications of CAD, though notdirectly connected to manufacturing, includemapping, architectural drawing and design,graphics for technical publishing, and anima-tion and special effects in cinematography.

Computer-Aided Manufacturing (CAM)Technologies

iComputer-aided manufacturing (CAM) is a-widely used term in industrial literature, andit has various meanings. Here it is defined sim-ply as those types of programmable automa-tion which are used primarily on the factoryfloor to help produce products. The followingsections provide functional deacriptions of fourCAM tools: robots, numerically controlled ma-chine tools, flexible manufacturing systems,and automated materials handling systems.

RobotsRobots are manipulators which can be pro-

gramed to move workpieces or tools alongvarious paths. Most dictionary definitionade-_scribe robots as "human-like," but industrialrobots bear little resemblance to a human.*

There is some controversy over the defini-tion, of a robot. The Japan InduStrial RobotAssociation, for example, construes almostany machine that manipulates objects to bea robot (essentially including the "hard auto-mation" mentioned earlier), while the oft-quoted Robotic InduStries Association (RIA)definition** emphasi2 (,..§ that the robot must

Plastic Mold's staff coula have transmitted the design infer-mation by telephone computer links; such activities have begunto be feasible within the last few years.

In this sense the technical upage of the term "robot" dif-fers from its dictionary definition (and from its roots in litera-ture; in particular Karel Capek's 1923 novel, R.U.R. (Rossum'SLlhittersW Robnts)A Fantastic Melodrama. (Garden Citv,_ N.Y.:Doubleday, Page & I923). A robot which resembled ahuman would be an "android," in robotics parlatTe: Such amachine has not been designed, and there doie not appear tobe substantial movement toward human-like robots (except,perhaps for motion pictures and other entertainment purposes).Later sections of this chapter will discuss adding certain an-thropomorphic characteristics and skills to robots.

**RIA (a trade association of robot manufacturers, consult-ants, and users, formerly the Robot Institute of America)defines a robot as a "reprogranimahliMWtifunctional manip7ulator designed to move material, parts, Molt, or apecialtzeddevices; through variable programed motions for the perform-ance of a variety of tasks."

Photo credit: Cincinnati Atilieriin Corp.

A robot used for welding

_be flexible, or relatively easily changed from,one task to another. The. RIA definition thusexcludes preset part-transfer machines used .

for decades as a part of large-batch and mass-production systems, whose path can-baehangedonly by mechanically reworking or rearrang-ing the-device. Also excluded are "manualmanipulators" or "teleoperators"devicesdirectly controlled by a human such as thosefor remote handling of radioactive material.

As OTA observed in an earlier repOrt onthis subject,8 industrial robots have a dualtechnological ancestry, emerging fititti: "1) in-dustrial engineering automation technology,a discipline that stretches historically over acentury; and 2) computer science and artificialintelligence* technology that is only a fewdecades old." Indeed, there is still a dichotomy

'Exploratory_ Workahop on the Social Impacts of Robotics:Summary and Issues (Wmaltington. D.C... U.S. Congress, Officeof Techriology Assessment, OTA-BP-CIT-II, February. 1982).

*Artificial intelliience research seekS to develop computersystems that can perform tasks which are ordinarily thoughtto require human intelligence.

59

50 Computerized Manufacturing-Automation: Employmeht, Edecatton; ana me workplace

ty, or intelligence of humans. A more accurateterm for these machine§ might be "program-mable manipulator." Nevertheless it is clearthat much of the great popular interest in ro-botics is rooted in the prevailing vision (ornightmare) of intelligent robots with human-like characteristics. Artificial intelligence willbe discussed in more detail in the "TechnicalTrends and Barriers" section of this chapter.

How Robots Work.There are three mainparts of a typical industrial robot: the control-ler, manipulator, and end-effector. The con-troller consists of the hardware and softwareusually involving a microcomputer or micro-electronic componentswhich guides themotions of the robot and through which theoperator programs the machine. The manipu-lator consists of a base, usually bOlted to thefloor, an actuation mechanismthe electric,hydraulic, or pneumatic apparatus whichmoves the armand the arm itself, which canbe configured in various ways to movethrough particular patterns. In the arm, "de-grees of freedom"basically, the number ofdifferent jointsdetermine the robot'S dexter-ity,s_well as its coMplexity aind/cost. Final-ly, the end-effector, usually not sold as partof the robot, is the gripper. weld gun, or othertool which the robot uses to /perform its task.

The structure, size, and complexity of theunit varies depending_on theapplication andthe industrial environment. Robots &Signedto carry lighter loads tend to be smaller, andoperated electrically; many heavier units move

--their-manipulator hydraulically. Some of thesimpler units are pneumatic. Some of theheaviest material-handling robots and thenewer light-assembly robots are arrangedgantry-style, that i§, with the manipulatorhanging from an overhead support. A few ro-bots are mobile to a limited degree, e.g., theycan roll along fixed tracks in the floor or intheir gantry supports.

Similarly, there is a great variety of end-effectors, particularly grippers, most of whichare customized for particular applications.Grippers are available to lift several objects

at once, or to grasp a fragile object withoutdamaging it (see fig. 5).

ProgramingThere are essentially twomethods of programing a robot. The mostcommonly used method is "teaching by guid-ing." The worker either physically guides therobot through its path, or uses Switches on acontrol panel to move the arm. The controllerrecords that path as it is "taught." Just begin-ning to emerge is "offline programing," wherean operator writes a programin computer lan-guage at a computer terminal, and directs therobot to follow the written instructions.

Each method of programing has advantagesthatdepend on the application. Teaching byguiding is the simplest and is actually superiorfor certain operations: spray painting is an ex-ample where it is useful to have the operatorVide the robot arm through its Path, becetSeof the continuous, curved motions usually net=essary for even paint_ coverage. However,teaching by guiding Offers minimal ability to"edit" a pathi.e.; to modify a portion of thepath without -re- recording the entire path.Off-line programing is usefill for several reasons:I) produCtiOn need not be stopped while therobot is being programed; 2) the factory floormay be'an inhospitable environment for pro-graming, whereas offline programing can bedone at a compUter terminal in an office; 3) ascomputer -aided manufacturing technologies

.,become more advanced and integrated, theywill increasingly be able to automatically gen-erate robot Programs from design_and irianu=facturing data bases; and 4) an offline, Writ=ten program can better accommodate morecomplek tasks; especially thoSe in which"branching" is involved (e.g., "if the part isnot present; then wait for the next cycle ").These branching decisions require some kindof mechanism by which the robot can senseits external environment. However, the vastmajority of robotic devices are unable to sensetheir environment, although they may have in-ternal sensors to provide feedback to their con-troller on the position of the arm joints;

Ch. 3Programmable Automation Technologies 51

Figure 5.Sample Robot Grippers

For small diameters Internal, 3 fingers

Internal For large objects

Vacuum. curved surface Vacuum, several parts

Vacuum corrugated surface Balloon lifter, bottle8

SOURCE Tech Tran Corp. Industrial Robots A Summary and ForeE.Ast. 1983

Fitted to the diameter

For cast parts

Vacuum pad, several parts

Magnet lifter

Fitted to the iohgth

Vacuum, double

Vacuum, record player

Magnet lifter

52 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace-------- -

Sensors.Devices for sensing the externalenv' onment, while often used in conjunctionwi robots, are a growing technology in them-

__ se ves. The simplest sensors answer the ques-tion; "Is something there or not?" For exam-ple, a light detector mounted betide a convey-or belt can signal when a part has arrived be-cause the part breaks a light beam. Somewhatmore complex are proximity tensors which, bybouncing sound off objects, can estimate howfar away they are. The technclogy for thesedevices is fairly well-established. But the mostpowerful sensors are those which can interpretvisual or tactile information; these have justbegun to become practical.

Ideally, vision sensors could allow a robotsystem to respond to changes in its environ-ment; and inspect products, as well as or bet-ter than a human could. However, using com-puters to process images from a video camerahas proven to be an extraordinarily difficultprograming task. Routine variations in

the complexity of the everyday environ-ment, common variations in shape or texture,and the difference between a 2-D camera im-age and a 3-D world all complicate the task

of-computer-processing of_a_videaTimage.Other kinds of sensing devices, from prox-

imity sensors to touch and force sensors, havereceived much less attention than machine vi-sion, but they also could play an importantrole in the factory environment, particularlyfor assembly applications._Sensors will be dis-cutted in greater detail later in the chapter.

Applications. Table 6 displays some of themost recent robot use estimates. Figure 6 es-timates _the robot sales and total use in theUnited States for the next decade. Such sta-tistics should be interpreted with caution,however. In particular, the number of robotsin use is a highly imperfect measure of the lev-el of automation and modernization in an in-dustry or country. Process changes in manu-facturing which increase productivity may ormay not include robots. As one report on international use of robots observes:9

'OECD, "Robots: The USeri and the Makers," The OECDObserver. July 1983.

It is also important that robots be viewedas part of the overall changes taking placein manufacturing concepts with the increas-ing diffusion of automated manufacturingequipment; including computer=aided manu,factoring and computer-aided design sys-tems. The impact of new production con-cepts, equipment_ and systems on productioncontrol and machine utilisation, inventorycontrol and management efficiency will to-gether have a much greaterproductivity im-pact than the industrial robot alone.As noted earlier in this chapter, interna-

tional comparisons of robot "populations" arealso plagued by inconsistencies in the def-inition of a robot, particularly between theUnited States and Japan. Regardless of thedefinition Of robot used; Japan leads the worldin number of robots in use. The reasons for Ja-pan's emphasis on robot technology include

hiktbriCal_shnrrage of labor, and a tendencyto eVote more engineering expertise to man-Ufacturing processes than does the UnitedStates. In addition, the United States faced

Table 6.Operating Robot Installations, End of 1982

Country Number Pertent of tOtalJapan 31,900 66United States 6,301 13West Germany 4,300 9Sweden 1,450 3Italy 1;100 2France 993 2

United Kingdom 977 2Belgium 305. tPoland 285 ICanada 273 tCzechoslovakia 154 tFinland 98 tSwitzerland 73 tNetherlands 71 IDenmark 63 tAustria 50 tSingapore 25 tKorea 10 t

Total 48,428/Less than 1 percent.

Note: This table does not include9,000_./varlable susluenced manipulators':whichare_inctutiedirltheRWs estimate tor France. Statistics on robots differbecause of differing definitions of a robot, because of different methodologiesfor collecting data, and because "operating, robot iriStallettbilS"_teS_OSed In -thistable) may differ from "_robefoorsolation which includes some robots in labortories and others not yet in use. A December 1983 study by the MS. InternationalTrade Commission, for example ("Competitive Position of U.S. Producer Of

Robotics In Domestic and World MarketsighteSSlightly Moran! llgures f9r robotpopulation In the united States and West Germany (7,232 and 3,500, respectively).

SOURCE: Robot Institute of America Worldwide Robotics SurVok And Directory;1983:

63

Ch. 3Programmable Auton anon Technologies 53

Figure 6.Actual and Projected U.S. Annual Robot Sales and Installed Base Through 1992150

125

1G0

75

50

25

3100

36,300

26,500

19,500 19,200

13,700

50,000

InstalledbaSS

69,200

96;100

133,800

AnnualUnitsales

37,700

14,400

10,8008:20Q

6,200 7,0005.1004,500_

9 6001,400--r-1, 7901

2,000

r 1

3,600

1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992

YearNOTE: The projections above are highly speculative. Robot sales have not grown nearly as faslas_rnostirtdustryobtervers expected, and -one tn_dostry analyst

suggests that the above figures may be as =char.! 39_to &Iperce_nt too high. (E. Lustgarten, Vice President, Paine, Webber, Mitchell, Hutchins, Inc.,personaLcommunIcation, Feb. 7, 1984). On the other hand, robot vendors and the Robotic Industries Association still believe that a tremendous upsurgeIn robot sales Is forthcoming, and the projections above may even be too low. (L. Lachowlcz, Robotic Industries Association, personal communication,Feb. 7, 1984). See ch. 7 for further discussion of the robot Industry and its prospects.

SOURCE' Tech Tran Corp Industnal Robots: A Summary and Forecast. 1983.

54 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

labor surpluses throughout the 1970'S, whichtended to induce manufacturers to use labor

instad-ofequipmerit in- production: Chapter9 will discuss international comparisons inmore detail.

Sophistication in reprogramtnabilitY, as wellas size and degrees of freedoth, are some of thekey cost factors for an industrial robot. A Sith,pie "pick-and-place" machine with 2 or 3 de-grees of freedom costs roughly $5,000 to$30,000; while more Complex programmablemodels; often equipped with microcomputers,cost approximately $25,000 to $90,000 andup)°

Table 7 lists some of the potential applica=tions for industrial robots. Many of the firstapplications of robots have been forparticular-ly unpleasant or dangerous tasks. One of theearliest uses; for example, was for loading andunloading die-casting rrifiehirieS, a hazardousand unpleasant task because of the extremeheat. The best-knoWn tiSeS, however, havebeen in spray painting and spot welding in theauto and related indUStries. In these applica-tions, robots have proven to be usefulfor performing particularly hazardous and monoto-nous jobs While offering enough flexibility tobe easily adapted to changes in car models orbody styles.

There are a number of motivations behindthe use of robots on such unpleasant jobs. Im-provement of job conditions_ (and, consequent-ly; worker morale) is one of them, though itmay not be the primary one. Such jobs oftenhave high worker turnover and inconsistentproduct quality because of their unpleasant-ness. AlSo, compliance with the occupationalSafety and health regulations that protect Peo=

ple performing these tasks adds to prOductioncosts. In addition tasks like spray paintingand spot welding are often relatively easy toautomate because the paths the robot is to fol-low are predictable; and the tasks are repeti-tive and require little sensing capability.

'°E. Lti§tgatt6h; Vice President, Paine, Webber, Mitchell,Hutchins, Inc., personal terninurlication.

Table T.Examples of CilittentRobot Applications

Material Handling: ;

Depaltetizing wheel spindles into conveyorsTransporting ex_plOsiv_e devicesPackaging toaster ovensStacking engine partsTransfer of auto parts frotri madhine to overheadconveyer_Transfer of turbine parts from one_conveyor to anotherLeading transmission cases from roller convveyor tomonorailTransfer of finished auto engines frein assembly to hottestProcessing of thermometersBottle loadingTransfer of glass from rack Cutting line

Machine loading/OW-ceding:Loading auto parts kir grindingLoading auto_components into test machinesLeading gears onto CNC lathesOrienting/loading transmission parts onto transfermachinesLoading hot form pressesLoading transmission ring gears onto vertical latheSLoading of electron beam welder_Loading cylinder heads onto transfer machinesLoading a punch pressLoading die cast machine

$pn_n!_painting:Painting of aircraft_parts on automated linePainting of truck bedPainting of underside of agricultural_equipmentApplication of prime coat to truck cabsApplication of thermal material to rocketsPainting of appliance components

Welding: _

Spot -- welding -of auto bodiesWelding front -end loader bucketsArc welding hinge assemblies on agriculturalequipmentBraze alloyinckof aircraft seamsArc welding of tractor front weight supportsArc Welding of auto axles

Madhlithig:Drilling aluminum panels or aircraftMetal flash removal frein casingsSanding missile wings

Assem_bly:Assembly of aircraft parts (used with auto -rivetequipment) --

Fliveting small assembliesDrilling and fastening metal panelsAssembling appliance switchesInserting and fastening screws

Other: --

Application of two-part urethane gasket to auto partApplication of adhesiveInduction hardeningInspecting dimensions on parts

_Inspection of hole diameter and wall thickneSSSOURCE: Tech Tran Corp.. Industrial Robots: A Semrnaty and Forecast. 1983.

Ch. 3Programmable Automation Technologies 55

While spot welding; spray painting, andloading/unloading applications have been theprimary uses for robots; increasing sophistica-tion in programmability and in sensing is en-abling applications such as arc welding andassembly.

As an example of such an application; awelder at Emhart Corp.'s United Shoe Man-ufacturing plant in Beverly, Mass., uses arobot to arc-weld frames for shoemaking ma-chinery* (see photo).-,He welds several dozenidentical frame units at a time; each frame unitrequires perhaps a dozen 2-inch welds to at-tach reinforcing bars to a steel sheet. The weld-er clamps the first sheet and reinforcing bars

*OTA site visit, Emhart Corp., United Shoe ManufacturingPlant; Beverly, Mass.; June 28, 1983.

onto a table. Using directional buttoni-on a"teach pendant"a portable panel attachedto the robot's controllerhe directs the robotto the spot where it is to begin the first weld.He pushes a button to record that location.Still using the teach pendant, he moves the ro-bot to the end of the weld and records that lo-cation. Then he presses a button which in-structs the machine to "weld a straight linefrom the first point to-the second." After re-peating this process for each of the dozenwelds, he gives the commandfor the robot tobegin welding, and the robotiollows the pathit has been "led through"this time with itswelding gun on. For each subsequent identicalframe unit, all that is required is to clampdown the parts in the same lotation as theoriginal set on which the machine was

0_1

Photo credit: Emhart Corp.

Welder Pete Bolger at Errihart's United Shoe Manufacturing Plant iises_a "teach pendatir_te:program arebet to _weldparts of a metal frame, below left. After the robot is taught the correct steps, it can repeat these steps with Its welding

gun on, while the operator can set up another frame on an adjacent table or perform other duties

6625-452 0 - 84 - 5 S QL 3

56 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment; Education, and the Workplace

"taught," signal the machine to begin; andthen inspect the welds after the machine corn-pletes its program. The robot controller canstore several programs, so that the operatorearl/it-se the robot to weld different types offrames in any order he chooses, as long as hesets up the Steel plates and reinforcing barsin the appropriate positions.

Note that this application of a robot for arcwelding does not use sensors, even thoughthere has been extensive work done on devel-oping vision sensors that allow \the robot to"see" the seam formed by the two pieces ofmetal, and to follow its automatically: Forthe fairly simple, straight-line applications atEmhart, - sensors_ are not necessary. However,if the frame units Were out of position by ahalf-inch, the welding robot would put a uSe-less blob of metal where it expected the jointto be. If a clamp was in the way of a pro=grained weld, the robot would attempt to weldthrough the clamp; damaging the clamp anditself in the process.

The advantages of robots depend on wheth-er one is comparing them to hard automationdevices or to human workers. Clearly; the flex-ibility and programmability of robots is prom-inent in the first case, while in comparisonwith humans the advantages are likely to bethe robot's greater consistency, endurance,arid ability to tolerate hostile environments.

The disadvantages of robots also depend onwhether 'they are compared with other auto-mation or humans. In the former case; roboticdevices are sometimes more expensive than ahard automation device which is not program-able, and they are not as typical robotmoves About as fast as a human, while dedi-cated automatic part-transfer devices canoperate at considerably greater speed. Theclear advantage of human workers over ro-bots, on the other hand, is in situations-whereextensive sensing, judgment, or intelligenceis required, and/or where situations change sofrequently that the expense of programing arobot is uneconomical. For these reasons it isoften suggested that humans, robots, and hardautomation devices are best suited for low,

medium, and high production volumes; respec-tively; although there are many exceptions tothia=e.g., automotive spot welding; Each sit-uation must be evaluated individually.

The design of automated production proc-esses involves determining which tasks aremost suitable for a machine, and which aremost suitable for a human. Several technolo-gy experts have argued that some manufac-turers' visions of robots as replacements forhthrian Workers will prevent the best alloca-tion of taaks between human and machine.Orie researcher argues:

A robot is a_ machine. It Should be de-signed controlled, and operated as a ma-chine. Any attempt to emulate human behaV:for with a robot is a misdirectibri. Take, forexample, the task of turning a bolt. A humanturns down a bolt in roughly half-revolutionincrements. At today's 4tate-of-the-ait, mostrobots are constrained to perform the taskin the same way. But robots need not be con,strained the way humans are; The most distalaxis of a robot-should be capable of continu-ous rotation. Theprimary advantage that ro-bots will have in the manufacturing marketof the future will be based not on their abili-ty to Mimic human§ , but on their abilities toperform tasks in ways which humans can-

General-purpose robots are already evolvingtoward special-purpose programmable devicesfor a particular task (e;g;, assembly machines,painting machines); and this evolution maycontinue so that few robots in the futtire looklike the \general-purpose "arm" Of today.

Though they will not be covered in detailhere, robotics technology has a wide range ofnonmanufacturing uses including handling ofradioactive material; miningiundersed eicpler=ation, and aids for the handicapped."

"W. P. Seering, "Directiens in Robot Design," Transactionsof the ASME March 1983, pp. 12-13.

"See, for example, T._ N. Sofyanos and T. B. SherithmAnAssessment of Undersea Teleoperstore, Sea Grant College Pro-gram, MaSsachnsetts Institute of Technology, June, 1980; A.Seireg and J. Grundman, "Design of a Multitask ExoskeletalWalking Device," 13iamechanica of Medical Devices-13- N.Ghista (ed.) (New York: Marcel Dekker Inc., 1981), PP- 569 -639:

58 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education; and the Workplace

In cirdinary NC machines, programs arewritten at a terminal which, in turn, punchesholes in a paper or Euler plastic tape. The tapeis then fed into the NC controller. Each set ofhdleS represeritS a command, which is tr._ns-inittd to the motors guiding the machine toolby relays and other electromechanicalSwitches. Although these machines are notcomputerized, they are programmable in thesense that the machine can easily be set tomaking a different part by fc eding it a differ-ent punched tape; and they are automated inthat the machine moves its cutting head; ad-justs its coolant; and so forth; without directhuman intervention; However; most of thesemachines still require a human operator,though in some cases there is one_operator fortwo or more NC machine-tools. The operatorsupervises several critical aspects of the ma;chine's operation:

1. he or she has override cor.trol f-;:: modifythe programed speeds (rate of motion ofthe cutting tool) and feeds (rate of cut) (seefig. 4). These rates will vary depending onthe batch of metal used and the conditionof the cutting tool;

2. he or she watches the quality and dirnen-sions of the cut; and listens to the tool,replacing worn tools (ideally) before theyfnil; and

3; he or she rr.c-1.;!.;.:s the process to avoidaccidents or clamage--e.g., a toolcuttinginto _a misplaced clamp, or a blocked cool-:int bile.

t'ypii-olv; NC programs are written in a langvag-e co, APT (AutomatiCallY PrbgramedTools); 11 was developed during the initialAir Force research on NC (see fig. bt a sam.ple of ail_ APT_prograrn). A number .of modifiedversions of APT have been released ',13 the lastdecade; and some of these are eas;er to usethan the original. _But the essential co!iceptand structure Of the_numerical codes his re-mained the same. In large part becauseof themomentum it gained from its initial DOD sup-ptitt, APT he become a de facto standard forNC iilAchitie tools.

Figure 7;--Sample APT Computer Program2.5"

113"

The path of the center of the cutter is shown as it movesatiolit the perimeter of the part:

(1)(2)

(3)(4)

(5)

PARTNO FLAT PLATE NO 12345678MACHIN/MODEL PTXCLPRNTCUTTER' ,

FEDRA I 0(6) SP = POINT/ - .5, - .5,1(7) P1 = POINT/0,0,0(8) Lt = LINE/PLATANGL,0(9) C1 = CIRCLE /2;:5;:5(10) P2 = POINT/0,1,0(11) L2 = LINE/P2,PARLEL,L1(12) L3 = LINE/P2,PERPTO,L1(13) FFIOM/SP(14) GO/T(1,L1 _ -(15) GORGT/L1,TANTO,C1(16) GOFWD/C1,TA NTO, L2(17) GOFWD/L2,PAST,L3(18) GOLET/L3,PAST,L1,(19) GCTO/SP(20) FINI

The APT_cotncM'er_prograni-L above. di'acts a machine tool to cutarounulhe perimete of a flat metal ;;art o.th a semicircular end (seetop d;ogiam). It: tne ograrn first identifies the part. andtine(2)_call:Laot :he :+ostorocesf,or 1.7 the mrch.n.:,icontrol combinationtt7:11 to rtv..;..r6ne the pari Tie ; :,:.storoce:I.or is -that part of ihe

software progrvi, ir.R7 le.! )r- th: tape instructions tor theparticu!er machine /control L,ne (3) notes that the corn -p _ is to print out the cO.,:roinatr-,, of all the straight-line moves ofthe cutter. line (4) notes that it cUtter S to have a diameterof 0.25inches. Line (5) describes th., nod rate in inches per minute. Lines(5) airough (12) dasC.riba i ii. geon;:itry of the part. Lines (13) throUgh(19) are motion statemen:s end doscribe the path of the cutter; Line(20) ends t`:t.. pa; r,e-Dram.

SOURCE. J J Cti.ictl, &',1ncipt., l Mimerfral Control (New Nork: Industrial Press,1982, 2P. 135

, Stuce 1976, machine tool manufacturershave begUn to use microprocessors in the con=trriller, and some NC machines come,equippedwith a dedicated minicomputer. Those calledcomputerized numerically controlled (CNC)

6 9

Ch. 3Programmable A tomatio Technologies 59

tend to be equipped with a screen and key-board for writing or editing NC_programs atthe machine. Closely related to CNC is directnumerical control (DNC), in which a largermini- or mainframe computer is used to pro-gram and run more than one NC tool simul-taneously: As the price of small computers hasdeclined over the past decade, DNC hasevolved both in meaning and concept intodistributed numerical control, in which each

hasmachine tool has microcomputer of its own,and the system e linked to a central con-trolling comput ": One of the advantages ofsuch distributed control is that the machinescan often continue working for some time evenif the central computer "goes down;"

In all types of NC machine tools the machin-ing processes are esFentially the samethe dif-ference is in the sophistication and location ofthe controller. CNC controllers allow the oper-ator to edit the program at the machine, ratherthan sending a tape back to a programer ina computer room for changes. In addition, byavoiding the use of paper or mylar tape, CNCand DNC machines are substantially more reli-able than ordinary NC machines; The tapepunchers and readers and the tape itself havebeen notorious trouble spots; CNC and DNCmachines; through their computer screens,may also offer the operator more complete in-formation about the status of the machiningprocess.

Some NC tools are equipped with a featurecalled "adaptive control;" which tries to au-tomatically optimize the rates of cut to pro-duce the part as fast as possible; while avoid-ing tool failure. As yet, there has been limitedsuccess with these devices.

Applications.The diffusion of NC tech-nology into metalworking industry proceededvery slowly in the 1950's and 1960's; thoughit has accelerated somewhat over the past 10years. Figure 8 and table 8 detail the US. pop-ulation Of machine tools. Numerically_ con-trolled machine tools represent only 4.7 per-cent of the total population," although this fig-

' "'The 13th American Machinist Inventory of MetalworkingEquipment 1983," American Machin-ist, November 1983, pp,113-144.

Figure 8.Total Number of Numerically ControlledMachine Tools in U.S. Metalworking

a12th Inventory data collected over 3 years. 1976 to 1978

SOURCE 13th American Machinist Inventory. American Machinist. November 1983.

Table 8.Estimated Total Machine Toolsin the United Statet

-t* Totalunits

Metal-cutting

Metal-forming

Metalworking 2,192,754 1,702,833 489,921Other industries 380,000 275,000 105,000Training_ ........ 74,000 70,000 4,000In storage and surplus 250,000 200,000 50,000

Total 2,896,754 2,247,833 648,921SOURCE: 13th Annual American Machinist inventory and estimates, American

Mathiniet, November 1983.

ure may be somewhat misleading: the newer;NC machine tools tend to be used more thanthe older equipment; and firms often keep oldequipment even when they buy new machines;Some industry experts have estimated that asmany as half of the parts made in machineshops are made using NC equipment. Never-theless, the applications still tend to be con-centrated in large firths and in smaller subcon-tractors in the aerospace and defense indus-tries.

Two examples from OTA's case studies il-lustrate a range of uses for NC machine tools;A Connecticut machine shop with 48 employ7;ees on the shop floor began using numericalcontrol technology around 1966, and now uses23 NC machines to produce contracted partsfor the electronics d aircraft industries. Bycontrast, one of the C machine shops at alarge commercial ore- space manufacturer oc-

60 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

cupies 471,000 square feetA-out the size of18 football lieldsand includes 110 NC andCNC machine tools, as well as 230 conven-tional machine tools."

The U.S. machine tool population is signifi-cantly older than that of most other countries(see table 9), and this situation,ruggesting rel-atively low levels1 of capital investment, hasbeen a source of concern for many in inclulT.tryand government. In 1983, for.the first time inseveral decideS, the percentage of metalcutkting tools leaS than 10 years old increased by3 percent, although the percentage of meta',forming tools less than 10 years old remainsat an all:time low of 27 percent."

DOD has encouraged diffusion of NC tech-nology, which has moved beyond the aero-space industryalthough not nearly as fastas most observer§ expected. There are severalreasons for the relatively slow diffusion of NCtechnology. They include high capital cost foran NC machine (perhaps $80,000 to $150,000and up, as opposed to $10,000 to $30,000 fora conventional machine tool).'6In addition, thesuccessful application of NC machine tools re-quires technical expertise that is in short Sup-ply in many machine shops. Training is a prob-lem, as some users report-requiring as muchas 2 years "to get an NC programer up tospeed."." Small machine shops typically do nothave the resources or expertise to train staffto use or maintain computerized equipment.Finally, "APT proved to be too complicatedfor most users outside the aerospace indus-try. . . . Most machlne jobs could be specifiedin a considerably 16s complex world."

However, intricate shapes such as those nowfound in the aerospace industry are nearly im-possible for even the most experienced ma-

.

"OTA work environment case studies.""The 13th Arnerfcan Medd:that Inventory of Metalworking

Equipment 1983' American Machhriet, November 1983."E, Lustgarten, Vice President, Paine, Webber, Mitchell,

Hutchins,_Inc:; personal communication."A. M. Greene, "Is It Time for a New Approach to NC Pro-

gramming?" /ron Age, Sept: 24, 1982. -p, 83. The need for sub-stantial training applies not only to NC machine tools but tovirtually all PA devices.

"Industry and Trade Strategies, unpublished paper preparedfor OTA, April 1983, p. 28.

chinist using conventional machine tools. WithNC., the parts can be more consistent becausethe same NC program IS used to make the partetch time it is produced. A manually guidedmachine tool is more likely to produce partswith slight variations,_ because the machinistis likeky to use a slightly different procedureeach ti Tfa he or she makes a part. This maynot be, a problem for one-of-a-kind or customproduction, but can cause headachGs in batchproduction. The advantages ir, consistencydue to NC are seen by many manufacturersas an increase in their control over the machin-ing process.

NC machines tend to have a higher "through-put" than conventional machine tools, andhence are more productive, They are operating(i.e., cutting metal) more of the time than aconventional machine tool because all thesteps are established before the machiningbegins and are followed methodically by themachine's controlh'r. Further, on a complexpart that takes more than one shiftof machin-ing on a conventional machine tool, it is verydifficult for a new machinist to take overwhere the first left off. The part may remainclamped to the machine_ and the part and ma-chine tool lie idle until the original machinistreturns. On NC machines, operators can sub-stitute for each other relatively easily, allow-ing the machining to continue uninterrupted.

As discussed previously, the capability ofguiding machine tools with numeric codesopens up possibilities for streamlining theSteps between design and production. The geo-metric data developed in drawing the producton a CAD system can be used to generate the..NC program for manufacturing the product.

Flexible Manufacturing SystemsA flexible manufacturing system !FMS) is

a production unit capable of producing a rangeof discreteproducts with a minimum of man-ual intervention. It consists of productionequipment workstation§ (machine tools orother equipment for fabrication, assembly, ortreatment) linked by_a materials-handling sys-tem to move parts from one workstation to

Table 9,Age of Machine Tools in Seven Industrial Nations

Year

MetalCUtting machines JtetalfQrmi.n maailnes

UnitS 0.2 yr 04 yr 0.9 yr 15 yr_a204r _Units 0.2 yr 0.4 yr _0.9 yr 15 yr 220 yr

United States 83 1;703;000 14% 34% 32% 490;000 9% 18% 37%

Canada 78 149,400 41 37 61,400 23 - 26

Federal Republic of Germany. 80 985,000 15 34 48°/a 265,000 15 34 48%

France 80 584,000 16 35 32 177,000 16 35 32

Italy 75 408,300 41' 29° 133,000 29° "7 258

Japan 81 707;000 15% 35b 37d 211;000 18% , 41b 31d

United Kingdom 82 627,900 41 27 146,80048a 28

80.5 years old; b0,1 years old; cn years old; d13 any old and up; 818 years old and up.

SOURCE 131h American Machinist Inventery, American Machfnisr; November 1983. (Note: American Machkict used a variety of foreign sources for this table),

62 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education; and the Workplace

another, and it Operates as an integrated sys-tern under full programmable controI:19

An FMS is often designed to produce a fami-ly of related parts, usually in relatively smallbatches,--in many _cases leSS than 100, andeven as_ low as one. Most systems appropriate-ly considered to be FMS include at leastfour workstations, and some have up to 32.Smaller systems of two or three machine toolsserved by a robot, which are sometimes calledflexible manufacturing systems, are more ap-propriately termed "machining cells."

How are FMS WorkS.-7-11Sing NC programsand (often) computer-aided process plannina9workers develop the process plan (i.e., the se:.quence of production steps) for each part thatthe FM S produces. Then, based on inventory,orders, and computer simulations of how theFMS could run most effectively, the FMSmanagers establish a schedule for the partsthat the FMS will produce on a given day:Next, operators feed the material for each part

'91V1. E. _Merchmt, personal conununicatio-, G:.t. 1983.Adapted from a definition- developed by the International In-..stitution for Production Engineering Research.

into the system, typically by clamping a blockof metal into a special carrier that serves bothas a fixture to hold the part in place while itis being machined, and ns a pallet for trans-porting the workpiece. Unce loaded, the FMSessentially takes over. Robots, conveyors, orother automated materials handling devicestransport the workpiece from workstation toworkstation, according to the process plan. Ifa tool is not working, many FMSs can reroutethe part to other tools that can substitute.

Machine tools are not the only workstationsin an FMS; other possible stations -includewashing or heat-treating machines, and auto-matic inspection devices. While most currentFMSs consist of groups of machine tools,other systems anticipated or in operation in-volve machines for grinding, sheet metal work-ing, plastics handling, and assembly.

The amount of flexibility necessary to de-serve the label "flexible" is arguable. SomeFMSs can produce only three or four parts ofvery similar size and shapee.g., three or fourengine blocks for different configurations ofengines. One FMS expert argues, however,

laustration credit: Cincinnati Milacron Co.P.

SbneMatiC diagram of an FMS for producing aircraft parts. The lines indicate paths of automatic devices which bringworkpieces to the machines

7 :4

64 a Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment; Education, and the Workplace

that in the current state of the technology, asystem that cannot produce at least 20 to 25different parts is not flexible. Indeed, some arebeing designed to manufacture up to 500parts."

The essential features that constitute aworkable "part farnily" for an FMS are:

A common s.!:ape. In particular, prisma-tic (primarily flat surfaces) and rotationalparts cannot be produced by the same setof machines.Size. An FMS will be designed to pro-duce parts of a certain maximum size,e.g., a 36-inch cube. Parts larger or muchsmaller than that size cannot be handled.Material. Titanium and coMmon steelparts cannot be effectively mixed, nor canmetal and plastic.Tolerance. The level of preciSionnecessary for the set of parts must be ina common range.

Applications. For a manufacturer with anappropriate part family and volume to use anFMS, the technology offers substantial advan-tages over stand-alone machine tools. In anideal FMS arrangement, the company's expel);sive machine tools are working at near fullcapacity. Turnaround time for manufacture ofa part is reduced dramatically because partsmove from one workstation to another quick-.ly and systematically, and computer simula-tions of the FMS help determine optimal rout-ing, paths. Most systems have some redundan-cy in processing capabilities and thus can au-tomatically reroute parts around a machinetool that is down. Because of these time sav-ings, work-in-process inventory can be dras-tically reduced. The company can also de-crease its inventory of finished parts, since itcan rely on the FMS to produce needed partson demand.

r finally, FMS can reduce the "economicorder quantity" for a given partthe batchsize necessary to justify setup costs. When apart has been produced once on an FMS, setup

"B. Joheaki, Manager, Manufacturing Systems Division, Cin-cinnati Milacron Corp., interview, Aug. 16, 1983.

costs for later batches are minimal becauseprocess plans are already established andstored in memory, and materials handling isautomatic. In the ultimate vision of an FMS,the machine could produce _a one-part batchalmost as cheaply as it could produce 1,000,in cost per unit. In practice there are unavoid-able setup costs for a part and a one-part batchis uneconomical. NeverthelesS, the FMS's cap-ability-to lower the economic order quantityis particularly useful in an economy_ in whichmanufacturers perceive an increased demandfor product customization and smaller batchsizes.*

A Midwestern agricultural equipment man-ufacturer, for example, uses an FMS to ma-chine transmission case and clutch housingsfor a family of tractors (see photo). They hadconsidered "hard J.tomation"a transferlineto manufacture the parts, but expected

*In defense production,_ several examples of the very high costof spare parts have come to light. In part because the set upcost for producing parts is so MO, the Pentagon's contractorsmay charge thousands of dollars for producing one or two smallparts. The traditional solution to this problem is to make spareparts when the original equipment is bought, and keep thespares on hand. However, studies indicate that more than 95percent of these spare parts are never used- An FMS couldsubstantially reduce the cost for maltingiftitiallnimba of partsbecause once apart has been made on the system and the tool-ing and production routing already established, setup costa arerelatively low.

Photo credit: Deere S Co.

A worker obtains status Information from a computerterminal at one of the workstations of _an FMS for

producing agricultural equipment

a new generation of transmissions within 5years, which would render the transfer line Ob=,solete. They chose an FMS instead because itcould be more easily adapted to other prod-ucts. In the system, a supervisory computercontrols 12 computerized machining centersand a system of chain-driven carts which shut-tle the fixtured parts to the appropriate ma-chines. The supervisory computer automati-cally routes parts to those machines with theshortest queue of workpieces waiting; and canreroute parts to avoid a disabled machine tool;About a dozen employees operate and main-tain the system during the day shift, and thereare even fewer people on the other two shifts.The system is designed to produce nine parttypes in almost any sequence desired. (Thus,it is rather inflexible according to the currentstate of _the _art.)_ It was, in fact, one of theearliest FMSs of substantial size to be de=signed. It was ordered in 1978, btit not fullyimplemented until 1981.21

Another example of-FMS application is asystem operating at Messerschmitt-Bolkow-Blohm's plant in Augsburg, West Germany;to manufacture the center section of Tornadofighter planes at a rata of 10 per month.T e system includes 28 NC machine tools, au-to - atic systems for cutting-tool changing andworkpiece transport, and complete computercontrol. One observer reports:

The system has demonstrated remarkableefficiencies. They find that the machines inthe system are cutting metal,-on the average,about 75 percent; or more; of themachine utilization is 75_percent better. Leadtime for production of it Tornado is only 18months, compared to about 30 months forplanes produced by more conventionalmeans. The system rechieed the number ofNC machined required (compared to doingthe same job with stand-alone NC machines)by 52.6 percent, required personnel by 52.6percent, required floor place-[sic] by 42_per-cent; part through-put time by 25 percent; to-tal production time by 52.6 percent, toolingcost by 30 percent, total annual costs by 24

2,0TA work environment case study.

Ch. 3Programmable Autorr;ation Technologies 65

percent and capital investment costs by 10percent.22

Finally, a Fanuc Ltd. factory near Mt. Fujiin Japan has-received a great deal of attentionand is similarly impressive. The factory pro-duces industrial robots and various CNC tools.It has two automated storage and retrievalsystems (these are described in the next sec-tion) as well as an automated materials han-dling system to di'iver materials to worksta-tions; Automatic pallet changers and robotsare used to load and unload machine _took-, fromthe automatic materials handling vehieles, andthe plant makes extensive use of unmannedmachining at night. The 29 machining centersare attended by 19 workers during the dayShift, while at night no one is on the machiningfloor, and one worker monitors the operationfrom a control room. Several other areas ofthis factory are not automated, howeverno-tably, assembly and inspection."

The chief problems related to an FMS arisefrom its complexity and cost. Several years ofplanning are needed for such a system, and in-Stalling and maintaining an FMS is likely torequire a higher degree of technical expertisethan manufacturerS may have available. Final-ly, because FMS is a system of interdependenttools, reliability problems tend to magnify. Inparticular, the materials handling portions ofFMS are notoriously troublesome. (See below.)

Despite the advantageS claimed for FMS,the systems are still relatively rare. Observersestimate_ that there are 20 to 30 of such Sy8=temS in Japan, 20 each in Western and East-ern Europe, and 20 to 30 in the United States."The reasons for this scarcity of application in-clude the complexity, newness and cost of the

"rvt. E. Merthwit,"Ccurrent_Status of; and Potential for, Auto-mation in the Metal*urking Manufacturing Industry," Annalsof the CIRP, vol. 32, no. 2, 1983. '

"Ibid;_ D. Nitzan, "Robotics in JapariA Trip Report," SRIInternational, February 1982.

"''CAM, An Internationdeomparison," American Machin-ist, November, 1981, pp. 207-226, W. Dostal, A. W. Kamp, M.Lehner. and W. P. Seesle, "Flexible Manufacturing SyStemsand Job Structures" iMitteilungen aus der arbeitsmarkt andberafsforschung), 1982. Reliable statistics on FMS are difficultto obtain becau&e -I conflicting definitions of an FMS and theearly stage of the t..schnology's development.

66 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

system.§. 4ne American manttfacturer estimatedthat FMS ic(3Str$600,000 to $800,000 per machin=frig Workstation; with a minimum expenditureof $3 million to $4 million." In addition, the in;house costs of planning for installation of ailFMSa process which Often tat-et severalyearsare likely to_ substantially increase theinvestment in tan FMS.

Automated Materials Handling SystemsAutomated materials hmidling (AMH) sys-

tems store and move products and materialsunder computer control; Some AMH systeitiaare used primarily to shuttle items to the workareas or between workstations on automatedcarts or conveyors. Automated storageand re-trieval systems (AS/RS)- are another form ofautomated materials handling, essentiallycomprising an automated warehouse whereparts are stored in racks and retrieved on com-puterized carts and lift trucks. For the pur-poses of this report, this category includesonly those materials handling systems whichare not classified as robots.

How AMR Systems Work.There are awide variety of formats for automated materi-als handling; They include conveyors, 1110110-rails; tow lines, motorized carts riding ontracks, and automated carriers which follow.wires embedded in the floor of the factory.Each t=ili/IH system is unique, and each is de-signeii _for _the materials handling needs of aparticular factory. The comnaonicharacteristicof these devices is that they arecontrolled bya central Computer.

There are three general applications for AMH.The first is to shuttle workpzetes between sta-tions on an FMS. In this casethe AMH sys-tem operates on command§ froth the FMS con-troller. For example, when the controllerreceives a message that a mach4le tool has fin-ished work on a certain workpiete, the control-ler orders the AIVIH system to pick up theworkpiece and deliver it to the next worksta-tion in its routing. The materials handling por-tion of the FMS is one of its trickiest ele;

"B. Johoaki, Manager; Manufacturing Systems Division, Cin-cinnati Milacron Corp., interview, Aug. 16, 1983.

Photp crodit: Cincinnati Milacron Corp.

Automated guided (alsbknown as a "robotca ") follows wires embedded_ in the floor of thefactory in order to shuttle workpleces from one part

of the plant to another

rents part transport needs tend to be logis-tically complicated, and the AMH systemmust place the part accurately and reliably formachining. Many AMH systems, such as con-veyors or tow chains, are serial in natureLe., there is only. one path from Point A toPoint B. This has caused FMSs to cease op-erating when a cart becomes stuck or a critcal path becomes unusable. FMS designer§have responded to this problem by designingAMH systems with bacicup paths, or by using,3l :items such as the wire-guided vehicle men-tioned earlier, which can be routed arounddisabled carts or other obstacles.

The Second major application of AMH is fortransporting work-in-process from one man-ufacturing stage to the next within a factory.This application is similar in concept to AMHuse for a flexible manufacturing system, al-though serving an entire factory is more com-plex. There is more area to covert more poten-tial obstacles and logistical diffiCulties in

Ch 3Programmable Automation Technologies 67

establishing paths for the AMH carriers, anda wider range of materials to handle. For thisreason, whole-factory AMH systems are notyet widely used. However, General Motors hasrecently agreedto purchase automatic guidedvehicles from Volvo which allo-a ?:.Lomobilesto proceed independently througr, the plantwhile being assembled. The "robot carts" canbe programed to stop at appropriate worksta-tions, and the cart system essentially replacesan assembly line. Volvo uses about 2,000 ofthe carts in its own plants in Europe.26 Fiatalso uses such carts in Italy.

The final application for AMH is in -auto-mated storage and retrieval systems. Thesesystems are often very tall in order_to conservespace and to limit the number of automaticcarrier devices needed to service the facility.In many cases the structure housing the AS/

26J. Walter, "Volvo Will Build Robot Carts," The DetroitNews, &pt. 27, 1983.

1 I

Photo credit: Cincinnati Milacron Corp.

An automated storage and retrieval system (AS/RS),with a computer termiral showing its status. An"automatic stacker crane" (top, enter) operates under

\ computer control

RS is built separately adjacent to the main fac-tory building; Design of an AS/RS depends onthe size of the products stored; the volume ofmaterial to be stored, and the speed and fre-quency of items moving in and out of_ the sys-tern; Advocates of AS /RS _cite advantages forthe system, as compared to nonantomatedsystems; which include lowered land needs,fewer (but more highly trainedl staff, more ac-curate inventory records, and lower energyuse.

Application&In theory; AMH systemscan move material quickly; efficiently; and re-liably; and keep better track of the locationand quantities of the parts by use of the com-puter's memory, thus avoiding much paper -work. They can minimize loss of parts in a fac-tory, which is a common problem in materi-als handling.

Deere & Co., for example, uses an extensiveAS /RS to store materials and inventory at oneof its tractor plants;27 The system's computer-ized controller keeps track of the productsstored on the shelves, and workers can orderthe system to retrieve parts from the shelvesby typing commands at a computer terminal.After they are retrieved fromAhe AS/RS, theparts can be automatically carried by over-head conveyors to the desired/ withinthe plant complex. f

IBM's Poughkeepsie plant is planning anAMH conveyor cart system for transportinga 65-pound computer subassembly fixturebetween assembly- and testing-stations; Themanufacturing manager reports that the deci-sion to adopt this system Was prompted bylogistical difficulties in keeping track of manysuch fixtures among a great variety of work-stations, as well as by worker health problemsrelated to transporting the fixtures manually.*

AMH systems often have reliability prob-lems in practice. A Deere & Co; executive re-

N lated -an anecdote at a recent National Re-sj

"G. H. Millar, vice president, Engineering, Deere & Co., lid:dress to National Research Council seminar on "The Futureof Manufacturing in the United States," Washington, D.C., Apr.13. 1983.

orra site visit; IBM Corp., Poughkeepsie, NY, June 9, 1983.

7 j

68 Computerized Mandfactunng Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

search Council symposium.28 Deere's AS/RSwas systematically_reporting that they hadmore engines stored on the racks than otherrecords indicated. After longweeks of search-ing for the problem they finally found theculprit: A leak in the roof was allowing waterto drip past the photocell that counted the en-gines as they were stored; hi essence each dripbecame an engine in the computer's inventory.

Although Deere's experience is doubtlessnot widely applicable to AS1RSs, the notionthat AMH systems seem to present unex:pected logiStical and _mechanical problemsdoes seem to be generally accurate. Eventhough these systems are a key aspect of flex=ible manufacturing systems and of computer=integrated manufacturing, materials handling

long been a neglected topic in industrialresearch. Materials handling system manu-facturers have only recently "caught up" toother industrial systems in level o-

and few companies have so far installedsophisticated AMH systems. Because of thisrelative lack of sophistication, materials handl-ing for FMS and CIM, especially for a com-plex application such as delivery of :ultipleparts to an assembly station, may -be one ofthe biggest problems facing integrated auto-mation."

Other CAM EquipmentWhile they will not be addressed in detail,

there are several other kinds of programmableautomation equipment used in manufacturing.They include:

Computer-aided inspection and testequipment For mechanical parts, themost prominent such device is the Coor-dinate Measuring Machine, which is aprogrammable device capable of automa-tic and precise measurements of parts. A

"G. Millar, op. cit."B._Roth, _professor of mechanical engineering, Stanford

University, '13rinciples of Automation,"addrais to the UnileverSyMpositun on Future Directions inManufacturing Te4mOlogy,Apr. 64, 1983; and4. Apple, senior vice president, SyStecon,Inc., "Retrieval and Distribution SystemA Pivotal Part ofFuture Process Planning," address to Technology TransferSociety Symposium on Factory of the Future; Oct 26-28, 1983.

I

Photo credit: National Bureau of Standards

A Coordinate Measuring Machihe uses a tiny butprecise probe center to automatically

measure parts

great variety of inspection and test equip-ment is also used for electronic parts.IBM's Poughkeepsie plant, mentionedabove; performs the vast majority q/- f its

testing of microproceSeor modules 'Withautomatic devices built in-house. In ad-dition; robots can be used as computer-aided inspection and test devices; severaltwo-armed, gantry-style robots are sedat IBM to teat the wiring for comp ercircuit boarda.* In the test; thousands fpairs of pins on the circuit board must btested to make sure that they are conec -ly wired together. Each arm of therobotis equipped with an electronic needle=likeprobe, and by touching its probes to each

*OTA site Visit, IBM Corp., Poughkeepsie, N.Y., June 9;1983.

8 u

Ch. 3Programmable Automation Technologies 69

pair of pins and passing an electronic sig-nal through the probes; the robot's con-trol computer can determine whether thecircuit board's wiring is "OK,"Electronics assembly. Increasingly, pro-grammable equipment is used to insertcomponentsresistors, capacitors, di-odes; etc.into printed circuit boards.One such system, Dyna-Pert, manufac-tured by a subsidiary of the EmhartCorp., is capable of inserting 15,000 partsper hour. A programmable machine as-,sembles spools of electronic parts in theright order for insertion into the circuitboard, and another machine inserts thecomponents.

6 Process control. Programmable control-;lers (PCs) are being used extensively inboth continuous-process and discrete-manufacturing industries. PCs are small;dedicated computers which are used toi2ontrol a variety of production processes;They are useful when a set of electronicor r-r-4.( harncal de vices must be controlled

cular logical sequence; as in a." e where the conveyor I,elt must

seriaecced with other tools, o. in heatzreatment of metals in which the sequenceof steps and temperature must be con-trolled very precisely. Until the late1960'S, PCs were comprised of mechorticalrelays, and were "hard-wired"one hadto physically rewire the device to changeits function or order of processes. ModernPCs are computerized, and can typicallybe reprogramed by plugging a portablecomputer terminal into the PC. A comput-erized PC is not only more easily repro-gramed than a hard-wired device; but isalso capable of a wider range of functions;Modern PCs; for example; are often usednot only to control production processesbut also to collect information about theprocess. PCs and numerical control de-vices for machine tools_ are very similarin conceptessentially, 1\1.1Cs are a special-ized form of PC designed for controllinga machine tool.

Programmable Automation andManufacturing Management

Several kinds of computerized-tools arebecoming available to assist in managementand control of e manufacturing operation. Theessential common characteristic of domputei-ized tools fez management is them ability tomanipulate and coordinate "data- _bases"=stores of accumulated information about eachcomponent of the manufacturing process. Theability to quickly and effectively get access tothese data bases is an extraordinarily power-ful management toolwhat was a chaotic andmurky manufacturing process can becomemuch more organized, and its strengths andweaknesses more apparent. The following-sec-tion describes some of these tools, as well asthe notion of "computer-integrated manufac-turing," which is not a tool or technology initself but rather a strategy for organizing andcontrolling the factory.

Management Information SyetemsManufacturers use and store information on

designs, inventory, outstanding orders, capa-bilities of different machines, personnel, andcosts of raw materials; among other things;In even a modestly complex business opera-tion; these data bases become so large snd in-tricate that complex computer programs mustbe used to sort the data and summarize it ef-ficiently; Management information systems(MIS) perform this fdfiction, providingreportson such topics as current Status of production,inventory and demand levels, and personneland financial information.

Before the advent of powerful computersand management information systems* someof the information which MIS now handle wassimply not collected; In_ other cases, the col-lection arid digestion of the information re-quired dozens_of clerks. Beyond saving labor,however, MIS bring more flexible and morewidespread access to corporate information.For example, with just a few- seconds of com-puter time a firm's sales records can be listed

Si-

I.

70. Computerized Manufacturing Automation: EMplOMent, Education; and the Workplace

by region for the sales staff, by dollar amountfor the salea managers, and by product typefor production staff. Perhaps most important7ly, the goal for MIS is that the system shouldbe so easy to use that it can be used directly bytop-leVel managers.*

Computer-Aided PlanningComputer-aided planning systems sort the

data bases for inventory, orders, and staff; andhelp factory management schedule the flow ofwork in the most efficient manner. Manufac-turing resources planning (MRP) is perhapsthe best-known example of computer-aided

.planning tOOl8.** MRP can be used not only totie together and summarize the various databases in the factory, but also to juggle orders,inventory, and work schedules, and to opti=Mize decisions in running the factory. In somecases these systems include simulationa of thefactory floor so as to predict the effect of dif-ferent scheduling decisions. MRP systemshave applicability for many types of industryin addition to metalworking.

Another kind of computer-aided planningtool is computer-aided process planning(CAPP), used by production planners to eatab=liah the optimal sequence of production opera-tions for a product; There are two primarytypes of CAPP systemsvariant and gener-ative.

The variant type, which represents the vastmajority of such systems currently in use, re-lies heavily on group technology (GT). In GT,amanufacturer classifies parts produced ac-cording to vai characteristics: e.g., shape,size, material, presence of teeth or holes, andtolerances. In the most elaborate GT systems,each part may have a 30- to 40-digit code. GTmakes it easier to systematically exploit sim-ilarities in the nature of parts produced and

*Sometimes the terms "management informationSystem"and "data base management system" (DBMS) are used inter-changeably. MIS tends to refer to a more powerful and compre-hensive DBMS aimed for -use by relatively high-level staff.

* *Two forms of MRP are mentioned in industry literature.The earlier version was materials requirementsplanning, a morelimited form of computer-aided planning system for ordoringand managing inventory. Manufacturing resoure,sometimes known as MRP II to distinguish it fr,

notion.

in machining processes to pr6dUce them. Thetheory is that similar parts are manufacturedin similar ways; So; for example, a processplanner might define a part, using GT classi-fication techniques; as circular with interiorholes, 6 ' ' diameter, 0.01 " tolerance, and soforth. Then; using a group technology -basedCAPP system; the planner could recall fromcomputer memory the process plan for a partwith a similar GT olaaaification, and edit thatplan for the new, but similar, part.

Generative process planning systems, on theother hand, attempt to generate an ideal rout-ing for a part based on information about thepart and sophisticated rules about how suchparts should be handled, and the capabilitiesof machines in the plant. The advantage ofsuch systems is that_proceaaplans in variantsystems may not be optimal. A variant sys-tem uses as its foundations the best guessesof an engineer about how to produce certainparts. The variants on that process plan maysimply be variations on one engineer's badjudgment.

Though generative CAPP may also dependon group technology; principleS, it approachesproceas- planning systematically. Theprinciple behind su_', syStems is that the ac-cumulated expertise of the firm's best processplanners is painstakingly recorded and storedin the computWa memory. Lockheed-Gegirgia,for eicample, developed a generative CAPPsystem called Genplan to create proCess plansfor aircraft parts (see photo for an example ofa process plan developed by Genplan). Engi-neers assign each part a code based on its ge-ometry, physical properties, aircraft model,and other related information. Planners canthen use Genplan to develop the routing forthe part, the estimated production times, andthe necessary tooling. Leckheed=Georgia offi-cials report that one planner can now do workthat previously required fOur to eight people,and that a planner can be trained in 1 year in-stead of 3 to 4.*

*OTA site visit, Lockheed-Georgia, Mar. 10-11, 1983: Genplan

was derived from a generative CAPP system developed by Com-

puter Aided Manufacturing-Internationala consortium forprogrammable automation research (see eh. 8).

7

', 1 I

Ch. 3Programmable Automation Technologies

T

t

I

! L:

!.. f 6. I '.

I : !. I - N

t I tt ;

3T

C - T T

,1 1 ' :

- T T

cc -

Photo Ueda TOckhodGoorgia co

An excerpt from a process plan developed by the -Genplan- system

Compu t er-Integrated Manufacturing.Computer-integrated manufacturing (CIM,

pronounced "sim-) involves the integrationand coordination of design, manufacturing,and management using c,07 puter-based systerns. Computer-integrated manufacturing isnot yet a specific technology that can be pur-chased, but rather an approaci to factory or-ganization :ind management:

Computer- integrated manufacturing wasfirst popularized by Joseph Harringt,on's bookof the same name, published in 1974. One ,ys-t ems expert recounts the histe)Iy of t he Jn-copt in this way:

\I I came about from: 1) The realizationI hat in many cases automation for discretetct ies in manufacturing. such as design

[machining; in fact often decreased the ef-

fectiveness of the entire operatione.g`., de-sit,mers could conceive parts with CAD thatcould not be made in the factory; NC machinetools required such elaborate setup that theycould not be economically programmed orused. 2) Development of large mainframecomputers supported by data base manage-ment systems (DBMS) and communicationscapabilities with other computers. TheDBMS and communications allowed func-tional areas to share information with oneanother on demand. 3) The dawning of the mi-crocomputer age which began to allow ma-chines in the factory to be remotely pro-grammed, to talk to each other and to report

activity t( their ultimate source, ofinstruction.'"

"D. Wisnosky, group vice president, GCA Corp., IndustrySystems Group, personal communication. October 198;Wisnosky is a former director of the U.S. Air Force- IntegrateComputer-Aided Manufacturing Program (ICAM).

8 ,1

72 Computerized Manufacturihg Automation: Employment, Edw7ation; and the Workplace

Though there is no quantitative measure ofintegration in a factory, and definitions ofCIM vary widely, the concept has becoinelightning rod for technologists and industrial=ists seeking to increase productivity and ex=pleit the corn! titer in manufacturing. For ex:ample, Jame s Lardner; vice president of Deere& Co., sees the current state-of-the-art menu=facturing process as a series of "islands ofautomation," in which machines perform tasksessentiallyautomatically, connected by "hu-man bridges." The ultimate st ze argues,is to connect those islands into all integratedwhole through CIM and artificial intelligence(described in the next section of this chapter);replacing the human bridges with machines;In this essentially "unmanned factory," hu-mans would then perform only the tasks thatrequire creativity, primarily those of concep-tual design. Lardner's vision is echcad bymany other prominent experts:

Experts differ in their assessment of howlong it might take to achieve this Visionvir-tually no one believes that it .s attainable inless than 10 to 15 years, while some expertswould say an unmanned factory is at leastthree decades away. More importantly; thereareother technologists who argue that the vi-sion_rnay, in fact, be just a dream. For exam-ple, Bernard Roth, professor of mechanical en-gineering at Stanford University; argues thatfactorieS will in reality, reach an appropriateand economical level of automation and thenthe trend toward automation will, level off. In

sense, the difference between these twoviews may be a different- degree ratherthan kind. For many facton,-..s, the "c.ppropri-ate" level of automation might indeed be veryhigh. In others; however, a fair number of hu-mans will remain, though they may be signif-icantly fewer than is currently the case.

Integrated systenis are often found to re=

quire more human input than was expected."Indeed, as one engineer explains:32

"This phenomenon has bcen noted in a variety of places, in-cluiDng OTA work environment case Studies, and the OTAAutomation Technology Workshop, May 29, 1983._

"B. Burns. Manufacturing Technology Group Engineer,Lockbeed-Georgia CO., cited in "Considering People Before Im-plementation," CAD/CAM Technology; fall 1983: p. 6.

There is much talk about the totallyautomated factory=the factory of the fu-ture-and night Shifts' where robots opvatethe factory. Whereas these situations willdevelop in some cases ... many manufactur-ing facilities Will not be fully automated.Even those thatiare will involv..: humans insystem design, control; and maintenanceand the factory will operate-within a torpor-ate organization of managers and planners;

The two views do have important signiTh-

cance for hoW an industrialist might now pro-ceed; Many Whb hold, the vision of the un-manned factOry S4ein to emphasize technolo-gies; such as robotics, that can remove hu-mans from manufacturing. Those whO do notshare the vision of "unmanned manufactur-ing" tend to argue that there are more practi=cal ways to enhance productivity in mantifac=turingincluding redesigning products for easeOf fabrication and assembly;

How UM Works..7-Thez* are two differentschemes for CIM: In -vertically: integratedmanufaCturing, a designer would design aproduct using a CAD system, which wouldthen translate the design into instructions forproduction On CAM equipment. ManagementinformatiOn systems and computer-aided plan;ning.SyStem?would 'be used to control andmbnitor the process. A horizontal approach tointegration, on the other hand, would attemptto coordinate only the manufacturing portionof the process ;, i.e.; a set of computer=aidedmantfacturingequipment on the factory flooris tied together and coordinai.od by-computerinstructions: A flexible manufacturing systemWould be a good example of such horizontalirtegratiorn* Vertically integrated manufac-turin r, is what is most commonly meant byCIM, however,_ and many exports would con-sider horizontal "shop flgor" hitegration tobe only partial CIM. Figure 9 is a conceptualframework for CIM which illustrates the roleof seine of the PA:technologies at variouslevels of factOry

'vertical amd horizontal integration of programmable auto-mation equipment lhou:d not be confused with vertkal andhorizontal integration in the markets for selling this equipment:this will be discussed in chapter 7.

Plan

Ch. 3Programmable Automation Technologies 73

Figure 9.Programmable Automation Factory Hierarchy (Simplified)

ComputerintegratedmanufatfUring

Integratedsoftware

System network

Robotics

Any manufacturingprocess

SOUR 'E GCA Corp lo,,ustrial Systems Group

A vertically into ..d faCtory usuallyplies maxim.: m us( ; trdinatiori of all PA

..technologies, and-,can invc..re much more cell;tralized control at processesthan a nonintegrated production process.Communication and shared data bases areespecially importatt. fo.7 CIM. For example,CAD systems must Lc; Ale to access datafrom inventory on the cost Ge raw materials,and from CAM systems on how to adapt thedesign to facilitate manufacture: Computer-aided manufacturing systems must be able tointerpret the CAT::design arid establish effi-cient process plans. And management .com-puter tools shou7d be able to d'zrive up-to-datesummary and p. rformance information frothboth CAD and CAM data rases, and effeetiVe-ly help manage the Mali ,,facturifig OPerati.bri.

Some parts of the above requirements arealready possible, while others seem far on thehorizon. Factory data bases now tend to becompletely separate; with very different struc-tirrs to serve different needs: In particular,the extensive corm-hunications between CADand CAM data bases will require moresophistication i^ both CAD_ end CAM,research on how to establish such ConununiCa=dons; and finally, major changes in traditional

Strategizn'Meant

Plan/manage

Monitor/control

Move/man,

Make

Implement

factory data structures in order to implementsuch a system.

tiplica tiOtts.CIM sounds like utopia toma matitifactiltet8 because it promises tosolve naarly ail of the problems in manufac-turing that were identified in the section on"the manufacturing process" at the beginningof this chapter, and in particular it promiseso dramatically increase managerial control

over the factory. Deegn changes are easy withextensive use of CAD; CAP and MIS systemshelp in 'scheduling; FMS and other CAMequipment cut turnaround time for mar ac-ture minin-dze production costs; and greatly,increase equipment utiliiat::,a; connectionsfrom CAD to CAM. help-create il:signs thatare economical to manufacture; control andcommunication is excellent, withpaper flow; and CAM equipinnit mitiimiLestime loss due to setup and materials handling.

Many at the companies which make eaten=siVe use of computers view the;.- factories asexamples of CIM, but on close examinationtheir integration is horizontalin the manu-facturing area onlyor at best includes

mam.facturing and managerrient. Boe-ihg, however, has made substantial strides

0 ;)

74 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment; Education; and the Workplace

toward a common deSign and manufacturingdata base system in_ their CAD/CAM Inte-grated Information Network (CI IN). Similar-ly, General Electric, as part of its effert tobecome a major vendor of factory automation

systems, haS embarked on ambitiousplans forintegration at Several of its factories; includingits Erie Ldcomotive Plant, its _SchenectadySteam Turbine Plant, and its CharlottesvilleConti-OIS Manufacturing Division.

Trends and Baniers: Future Application

While the possibilities for application of ex-isting prograrninable automation tools are ex-tensive,_the technologies continue to developrapidly. They depend on and share the extracm-(Unary rate of growth in technical capabilities

ccniputer technologies as a whole:

There are five themes in the directions fordevelopment in each of the technologieS. Theyare:

increasing the power of t he technologiesi.e., their speed, accuracy, reliability; andefficiency;increasing the:r versatilitythe range ofproblem§ to which the technologies canbe applied;increasing the ease of use so that they re-quire less oderat,- rime aid training, canperform more complex operations, andcai! he adapted to new applications morequickly;

okr;g what is comincrny called theintelligence of the systems, §o that theycan offer advice to the operator and re-spond to comp:cx situations in the man-ufacturing environment; andincreasing the ea.:e of integration of PAdevices so that they can be comprehen-sively coordinated and their data basesintimately linked.

.

This section first summarizes the principalresearch efforts and directions for develop-ment of the five technologiea on which thisreport foLises: CAD, robotics, NCmachine tools, 'FIV1$, and CIM. Next, it sur'marizes issues in several technii--il areas whichit ivy a large potential impact on all the tech-

arti5cial intelligence. standards :incl.interf,ic,:, lib man factor:;, rna.,i_xials, and sen-

sons: ChaPterS 8 and 9 describe the institution-al conti-rit for research and development (e,g,,sources Of R&D funding), and compare R&Dprograms on an international basis:

Trends and Bairiers in Five Technologies

Comput .-:r-Aided Design

Ther 3 are at least three generations oi CADequipment, two of whicl- are widely availablecomrnercililly_ with the third_still largely inprototype applications and R &1 abs'. Thefirst are the 2-D c omputc.-ized drafting sys-tems mentioned earlier in th-: chapter whichstreamline the process of drawing and espe-cirdly, editing the drawings of parts, plans, orblueprints. The seconu generation are 3-DCAD systems, which allow the user to drawan image of a part using either wirefr6incModels or "surfacing" (displaying the facesof objects).

The third generation, commercially availahlwithin the past few years but still in their infancy; are the So=calle'd solid modelers. Suci,systems (actually an expanded 3-D npaiiiii-ty ) can be used not only to draw the objet inthree dimensionS bat also to obtain a realiz: c

visualizatiOn of the part. Users can rotate,move and view the part from any angle; andin some cases, derive performance characteris-tics. Engineers at IBM's Poughkeepsie plant,for example, use an advanced CAD syster,; orthis type to design cabinet arrangements forIBM mainframe computers: Because the Sys---

t arn "constructs a sophisticated solid modelof an object, it can be used tc visualize Suchdesign issues as componer cleara ice prob-lems. One ca,i even "pull :Jut a C.,-awer- tomake sore u- do3s not hit a cable, for instance.

Ch: 3Programmable Automation Technologies 75

Photo crectl' Computervision Corp.

An exeicded view of a part assembly.from a CADystem with solid modeling capabilities

There seems to be a consensus among manu-facturing managers and researchers that suchthird generation 3-D CAD systems arc a criti-cal element in the proge,,:i.ES toward effectiveand powerful ;Ise of programmable automation;n factories. 'I he increased sophistication c3-D systems greatly improves the ability ofsuch syttens to communicate design specifi-cation:: to manufacturing equipment. Whilethird geaeration 3-D P-, stems are technicallyfeasible now i,licre are nontechnical barriersto implementation of 3-D systems. Li partbecause of the com- of the systems andthe problems encountered in switching from2-D .0 3-D systems:.'" In fact, there is a needfor a rourth generation, a CAD system whichoffers more "intelligent" design assistance andcan be ea. linked to other programmable)automation systems fcr manufacturing andmanagement:

Indeed, the.-t.- seen-. to be 11 ..-ee relatedthornes in current CAD rer:earch:

I improving the algorithms for represent-ing objects using the computer so design-ers can create and manipulate complex

It. Simon, Computervision Corp., personal communication,Oct. 6: 1983.

objects in an efficient and intuitively clearfashion; _.

2; adding "intelligenc_e" to CAD systems cothat they prevent design errors and facil-

_ itate_ the design process; and3. developing effective interfaces between

CAD systems and manufacturing andmanagement.

Improving Algorithm& Representingshapes in computer memory and manipulatingthose representations has been and remainsa difficult challenge for computer researchers.As the power and complexity of CAD systemsincrease, _their computing needs grow rapid-ly. One of the problems in manipulating com-plex shapes with the computer is illustratedby the experimental CAD :,estem used forcomputer cabinet design at IBM: One of itscreators reported that a typical manipulationof a complex object say, generating an im-age of the cabinet from a different viewingangle, with all hidden lines removedmighttake several minutes of computer processingtime.* Although the system is still useful;clearly- quicker response is needed for the de-signer to have optimal flexibility from a CADsystem; A shorter response time can comefrom a faster computer or from more efficientways of representfiig and manipulating shapesin computer memory.

Although faster computers are unquestion-ably on the horizon, much of the current re-search on CAD involves attempts at more ef-ficient representations. The efficiency of a cer-tain scheme alsc depends on hew easy it is touse A wide variety of schemes are beingstudied; none -of -which has a clear overall su--pericrity. One erne; called "constructivesolid geometry," involves assembling imagesby combining simple shapes, such as blo[its,cylinders and sphere:- The other is boundaryrepresentation, n witch an object is ,:on-

*D'I'A site visit, D. iiroF3man, IBM Corp. Yorktown !:eights.N.Y., June 8, 1983. "Hidden lines" in images are those edgesof a solid object that one cann,t_see from a given ewing angle.GrGasrnan reports that when_CAD is used for such mechanicalmodels a- the computer cabinets discussed here, each mod-21consists a polyli6dron with roughly 40,000 separate feces forthr corm,atcr t- Store, manipulate, and determine wl: '.er theywould be "hidden" or not.

76 Computerized Manufacturing Automation; Employment, Educa

--strutted as a set of individual surface& Forexample, one system being developed by agroup at the University of Utah is based on"splines." The designer manipulates on thescieen the equivalent of the thin metal stripsused in models of boats or planes. He Or Shecan expand them; curve them, cut them, andso forth to create the model."

There is some concern that not enough timeand effort in industry is being devoted to ex-panding the technologies; particularly the al-gorithms available for "solids modeling," i.e.,for true three-dimensional representatibris ofobjects. Thus tile !_`_experience base" of indus=tries experimenting With 3-D systems is verysmall, and such experience is necessary to re-fine the systems and determine the needs ofmanufacturing industries

Adding "Intelligence" to CAD; the in,dustry there is much discussion of "smart"CAD syst8ms which would not permit certainoperator errors: For example, they would notpermit the design ol an object that could notbe manufactured; a case without a handle, ora faulty circuit board. Further; they would fa-cilitate the designer's work by such functionsas compr:ing a design to existing designs forsimilar objects; and storing data on standarddimensions and design sub-units, such as fas-tcner a:7es and standard shapes. Such sysIxrnsmight also increase the ability of CAD ws-tems to Simulate the performance of products;There is much comorn over "bad design" inindustry, and intelligent CAD systems areconsidered one way to improve- the situation.

Though such systems have become ratheradvanced in electronics applications and offersome hope of be'oming moreSO, there i an yetlittie the way of "smart" CAD sySt_as formechanical applications. A few systems canbe programea to question a designer's chdceof certain features that are nonstandarda22-inm screw hole in a shop that only uses 20-

N 307rnm holes for !Aar -,. ScIne research-that it will be possi use an "ex-

pert' wstem (see the next section's discussion

"ft itekenfeld; professcr of computer science, UniN-rerSit,-,r of

Utah, persedal .mmunication.

Ch. 3Programmable Automation Technologies 77

Ay and cost of their designs: Such comprehen-sive connections between design and manufac-turing are currently far beyond the state-of-the-art.

There has, nowever, been modest progresstoward interfaces between CAD devices. TheInitial Graphics Exchange Standard, devel-oped at the National Bureau of Standardsunder U.S. Air Force sponsorship, allows dif-ferent CAD systems to exchange data (see ch.8): However, while interfaces between comput-er-aided design systems are becoming easier;there is as yet little progress in allowing CADand CAM systems to communicate. In somecases these devices can be wired together intoa computer network, but establishing an effee-tive interfaee requires sophisticated softwareto manipulate manufacturing iriforrriatien Sethat it is USeful for designers, and vice versa.

Movement toward design-manufacturingconnections is impeded by a strong traditionof aratism --sep among design engineers andmanufacturing engineers: A common descrip-tion of the relcit-- . is, "The design engi-ricer tfr: owF !"-; set. . drawings over 0'1c:17E111to man. There is evidence thatsuch bar riers are beginrunr breakSioWly, as the need for communication has1.:4;Coine apparent. and as engineering schoolshave begun to brow deli the terinectirriS be=tween design and manufacturing curricula.

There are many research effor is whose ulti-mate goal inciudes such connections betweenCAD and other manufacturing systems. Theseresearch programs include the Air Foree's In-tegrated Computer Aided Manufacturing proj=ect, as well as the NatiOnal Bureau of Stand=ardS (NBS) National Engineering Laberatoryand a joint M'eSt Gerrnan/NarWegian effort(see ch. 9). The heart of till; latt^r effort is anattempt to use a very adVanced geometricmodeling system dev Ted by the TechniralUniversity Of Berlin as the basis for develop-ing software which would allow design to beconnected to ail .1:,;,Jects of the manufacturingprocess. In addition, users of PA, such as GEand IBM, are also working on interrr issues:ssues.However, full integration still wrs at leasta decade off.

RoboticsRobotics research is currently an area of in-

tense interest in both industry and univer-sities. There are a dozen or more universitieswith significant ongoing research projects-inrobotics; and perhaps 3 dozen industrialand independent laboratories. Governmentlabs at NBS; the National Aeronautics andSpace Administration (NASA); and several atDOD; are alSo involved,

In part because Of the technical immattiri=ty of robotics technology, and in part becauseit is a complex and interdisciplinary teelmol=ogy, there are many discrete areas of researchproblems and possible directions for extensionof capabilities. The problem areas include:35

Improved positioning accu2-.?cy for the ro-bOt.arrii.=Increased accuracy is essential for many applications of robots, par=ticularly in assembly operations 5-and ethercases where a robot is programed offline.While current robots are precise (they canreturn to the same position on each cyclefairly reliably, within perhaps 0.00;'i inch),their accuracy (the ability to arr ve at apredetermined point in space); is not near-ly so reliable; Several techniques are be-ing used ta increase accurac' in robots:Thoug% the traditional ans., has beento increase the stiffness r rechanicalprecision of the manipulator arm, such ap- .

praaches can greatly iricreaoc, brie weightand cost at the unit. Software calibration;a technique aeirig developed at the aBSiinvolves adjustlitg the robot's electronicsto compensate for inaccuracies in itsmoverrients. AnOther technique invOlVesusing machine Vision systems to "watch"the robot Jill action and correct its r.nove7Manta They Occurthis techniquepotentially improve both accuracy andprecision. Of the two, software calibration

ar simple: technically and is likely tcivailable far sooner.

--"O. S. /Wm., "Indunrir I Pshot 14,-c no ogy and Pr

ty Improvement." Explo, nto.ry Wc.-kshop on the Sncial Iiifl Robotics: Summary. and Issues (Washington. D C.: U.S.

.ongress, Officc of Technology Asgessment, OTA-BP-CIT-11.1.ruary 1982). pp. 62-89.

8'1

78 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education; and the Workplace

Increased 'grace; dexterity, and speed.The physical structure of the manipu-latorits material, actuation mechanism;and jointshas remained substantiallythe same for several decades. Severalgroups of researchers, sponsored byNASA and the Defense Advanced Re-search ':-ejects Age;icy (DARPA); amongothers. are working on lighter structuresfor the robot arm. These would most like-ly consist of Composite fiber materialssimilar to those now used extensiVely onaircraft--about one-sixth the weight ofSteel. Though the technology for suchStructures exists, composites areextreme-ly expensive and the costis holding backfurther use in robotics. Other directionsfor progre-s in robot structures includefundamentally different &Signs for themanipulator arm; A SWediSh group hasdeveloped an arm whic:ii is structured insome ways like a hurrian Spinal column;while other research is directed towardusing "tendons" to effect movement ofthe ar..,, as in the hinnan musculoskeletalinftr.action.

Cost is not the only drawback to the useof lighter structural materials; In addi-tion; the robot'S controller must becomemore sophisticated in order to direct themotions of a lightweight, and inherentlysomewhat flexible, robot arm. For in-stance, computer scientists and mathema-ticians must Je'ielop control algorithmsthat will prevent backlashi;e., the "play"or vibration that occurs when the arm ismoved quickly from one position toanother.

Finally, gripper design needs to bemade r,ore flexible_ DiretibriS for prog-ress in grippers include both developing'hands" -hat can be uSed to manipulatea wider variety of oh' ^.t8, and also devel-oping "quick-change.' grippers so that therobot can autonomously exchange one"hand" for another.Sensors. including vision,_ touch and force.Because sensors can be applied to awide range of programerable automationdevices; they will be addressed in a sepa-

rate section later. One problem relevantto robots is the development of controlsySterns that can accommodate sensoryinformation. Systems are only now begin-ning to become available that can acceptfeedback from various -kinds of sensors.In part, these systems have developed inconjunction with new generations of iobotprograming languages, to be discussedbelow. A continuing tension in devel-opment of robots is whether one shouldstructure the robot's environment so thatit does not need e..-Ktensive sensing; or tryto provide sensors to enable it to copewith an unstructured environment;Model-ba,Sed control systems,The mostadvanced and versatile controller for arobot would he ono-. that had an internalmodel Of its environment. In other word§,it wc,.1-' a store of information aboutth. Isional world; what the Obi=

ie J. with wete sul.Nposed tonite, fa-id tzar rul s for hiOW

4.,ojects iiiteract with eac,c Other.Although this problem has int tiedmany tochnolegists, who view it t s oneof the ultimate solii_tions for expandingrobot versatility_ and "inteLliget're," it isextraordinarily diffieillt tU nripalt such i' -formation to the machine, -,ttid even todecide how one might structure suchinformation.Soft war e. --LMethc is for programing ro-bots are becoming easier and more effi-cient, although there is still substantialwork needed in this area. Two languageshave been released recentlyIBM's AManufacturing Language (AML) andRAIL, by Automatix which are consid7erably More powerful than traditionalrobot languages, and which permit moresophiStitated programing techniqueS,

advL iiced ger...ral-purpose com--puter languages such as PASCAL orADA. Most/other progratning language§tlirrently iiivaila.ble are rather eurribeir=some and inflexible by computer - industrystandards. At the same time; tetzliiiittby=guiding programing is becoming le§§practical for complex applicatidtia; it

jJ .

' pip Ii/ 444 4044 Op No 4. I 00 00 10 00 00 V4'')e,r," , ,,

I ese 1 41 00 ea 41 41 411 1 44 44 44 IP NJ 414 4 4. 4M

14 I \JD .4 I II I I1 1 I I 11 I 1 111 .14' 1 100111111 IV 0 411 . 12 411 so o 0 so r o 0 114or go co ile n n n

A .4i4 -4 " 114 V', ' I' PI 4 I"' f' .4 .1 44 I" 4, 4.1 30 10 IC4, on on PI I I PI 1141 PI 11 30 ON OR IP ac og og o org le lc

r.00 ..,.,_ 4. 1p , 04 CO 3C 49 PI I OR 3C IC 41'` OAP 04 10411 00"42 41 11 0 CP 41 IP * I1P 11 CV 41 41CI .6 IR 410 OR .1 3C C PI .4 ID II 4C 42 41.11 IC 4) 4 44 PI -4

,4. pp IR IC . .* 14 011 .4 v; ID Pt IP .IC a q7:,jdo 0 Ie 111 4 4 411 11 II 40 4C \. ,.4 CS 11 2.2 P 41 P1 4.-1111 dl PI 111 42 C) I sky' 41 04)CO'41C .1 OR .1 110 'C° 11 CI

4/ '4 '4 4344 4/ 4 "I 114 ikcill-,4-1.----. 0.1 4) IR 4: ItI' 4: % 1.,y) C) IP 4 6'..4 q) *I IP

44,47 II 4: // f'C) 0....1141 11 'V 44 01 42 n a: lo 4:

47 OAP IC Ct 11P IP) M: pp 4) pp 42 41 CO IPCl ... OR 110 (/ / C) 4 4f54C IR CPa...go ' 0.4 le 44. :C i ,111 3: 04 CO

4 4-. 0

OP 4 CP k -', 41) ei 4 PP CI4 20 IR . IC CY IIC 4)3 PC

\\

I, 4

N CD 40,,,,,, IIC

3C IA IC .N i %, 'IP N, 6

t

024

0

I

I

Cr+. 3-- Programmable Automation Technologies 79

.-ated Interface standards.Standards need tom or be developed for communication If infor-

mation between robots and machine tools;bade sensors, and control computers; WhileLe de- such standards are a tractable problem;sys- programmable automation producers; as

§ffee= well as the computing industry; are onlyi6 for beginning to make progress in establish-i has ing standards; and the stamdards-makingCAD process is long and intricate; In the mean-ir op- time; efforts to establish interfaces be-e ro- tween robots and other automated de-ctive vices are hindered_bY a lack of standards.rmas Researchers at :NBS report that someAped manufacturers refuse to divulge details of

the operation of their equipment that

simulation of a rcbon; operation

9

r?, Yektti

r.

Photo credit: Computervision Corp.

80 Computerized Var,,,faCturina Automation: Employment; Education. and the Workplace

would encluie the equipment to be linkedto other computers. (See the following dis-cussion of standards and interfaces.)Mobility. While techniques for limitedmovement along rails are already avail-able for robots, the more general problemof developing a robot that could navigateits way through a cluttered fadtory is farmore difficult. There is some argumentabout whether such mobility is even nee:essary for the factorysome would assertthat such technology is too esoteric forthe factory, and the plant should insteadbe organized so that mobility is unneces-sary. There is substantial research inmobility, however, in large part sponsoredby DOD agencies for specific battlefieldapplications.

Numerically Controlled Machine ToolsAlthough machine tools are a well-e8tab-

lished technology, there continues tb be a needfor substantial impi.ovenientS in the tools andtheir controllerS. A "Machine Tool TaskForce... operating under the auspice if DOD's.Air Force Materials Laboratory. si ed a report in 1980 calling for hundreds of improve-ments and new research efforts. Among theon most relevant to this sty dy t'z-Lose

listed in table 10."

-------Machine:Fool Task Force. "Technolou of Mocliine

A Survey of the State of the Art- ll,ivermore Calif Lawrence!Livermore National Laboratory. October 19801

The bulk of machine tool R &D takes placein the labbratories of machine tool and con-

irianufatturers.A smaller but signifi-cant amount of work is undertaken at univer-sity mechanical engineering departments, withfunding _fromindustry orthe Federal Govern=Merit. The chief research problems can _bedivided into those involving the machine itself;and those involving the controller;

The Machine Too/.Many of the develop-ment needS for machine tools involve deviceswhich facilitate the use of the tools under com-puterized control. For example, chip removal

disposal of the metal shavings that accumu-late in large volume during machiningis abig problem in industry, a problem that getsbigger as machines get more efficient andmore automated. Various schemes have beenused for chip control and disposal; none ofwhich are entirely satisfactorT Many engi-neers believe the answer is not to create thechips in the first place§y forging the partc'ose to its final shape; fob example, or machin-ing with lasers instead of cutting tools. While"near net shcpe"_ forging is becoming moreprevalent, laser machining ;is still immature,and not yet practical for widespread appli-cations;

Another problem in machine tools; whetheriiated or manual, is tool wear: A drill bit

cr grinding wheel has a fixed useful life, after'.4:11ich the quality of cut begins to decline andthe tool eventually fails; The traditional sblu=tinn to tool wear is simply for an experienced

Table 10.=Machine Too' Task Force Recommendations or Mproving Machine Tool Control::

Hardware (H) orsoftw;rn (S)

Area of improvementToolsettingDi- :-1.).1lcs and sensors HrS

Fixtuiinyic -: icingNC progmn .1g and instruction

Pr qrarnmable controls .

:ntert.s.r.s stann,-rr'S

,Gig- ;cal, Task Fp.r: 7nchnnlogy 7,T, ,net"

HS

ObjectiveReduce setup time, 'improve accuracyAlloW more et the in pc,rtant prirameters to be sens;-;d and

monitored for failure identification!W.:re versatility of fiktUre and less Se., timeDevelop irnprovec ie computer :,uFiroutines simplify

and reduce rime for programingIntLgrate machine prcc:esses int-. computerized system;

enhanc: conVeriliC.Inal MaChina oparations; p :videinterfacing 60,:iC:.As and flexibilit

HIS improvr. upgrzrlind and grt. Nth-retrofit polenti..l:

Oc!cber :r80.

Ch. 3Programmable Automation Technologies 81

machinist to listen to the machine tool and,ideally, sense when noise and vibrations be-come abnormal. In situations where that is notpossible, particularly on CNC machine tools,machinists replace the tool after a specifiedperiod of tool life. In addition, the Japaneseare said to run their machines at slower speedsin order to minimize tool fr. during un-manned machining; However: can fail atalmost any point in their uf.,. (4:11 bit mayfail after it only drills a or it maylast for hours; This variabii 2 makes pre-schedWed replacement difficult and inefficient.There has been some progress in developingdeviCes that 'can sense tool wear and reportwhen tool 7,c-flange is needed. The NationalBureau of/Standards, for example; has a pro-totype device that "listens" to the vibrationsproduced by the tool and can be "taught" torecognize abnormal vibrations.

The rate at which a machine tool can cutmetal depends on many factors:the type ofmetal, the depth of cut; the condition of thetool; and so forth. Controlling the speed of cutor the feed rate so as to cut metal at optimumremoval rates has been a continuing researchand development problem in the industry. Aswith sensing tool wear, the traditional answerhas been for experienced machinists to adjus;a cutting speed or feed rate dial on the ma-chine. In the past decade, various "adapti-vecontrol'' devices have been developed whichvary the "speeds and feeds" of the machinetool based on motor load, for instance. How-ever, these devices have had uneven reputa-tions for effectiveness and reliability.

!'inally, a great deal of effeit is now beingde _ed to increasing precision in --lachinetoo- T!--Le Navy's precision manufacturingprop ' rill be descrirl-fed in chapter 8.

Relatea improvements in precision; along-term g; al for machine tool technology in-volves mea.s:rement of parts during machin-ing. With such a scheme, quality problemscould be identified and CO/Tected during man-ufact-Iring rather than afterwards, therebyreducing waste. NBS has done some preliminary research on .uch a system of on line

metrology at machine tools, although commer-cial use of suer, -4,,,;-;tems is limited to very sim-ple and pre.n, able part geometries.

Machu: :e Controllers.As with allother _forms of programmable automation,there is continuing demand for and researchon simplifying programing of NC machinetools; the seine holds true for the need tosimplify and set standards for interfacesbe-tween machine tool and controller, betweenmachine tools, and between machine tools andother automation devices. A critical issue isthe development of effective interfaces be-tween CNC machines and other computerizeddevices; so that; for example; CNC machinescan derive their cutting instructions from thestored dimensions of a design produced withCAD; This is now possible only in specificlimited situatioris, where tremendous efforthas been devoted to developing the interfacesfor a particular application.

Flexible Manufacturing SystemsFlexible manufacturing systems for the ma-,

chiniiig of prismatic parts ere becoming moreprevalent, and are a relatively establishedtechnology. FMS for rotational parts are justbeginning- to be available, while the range ofother_ possible _applications for FMSgrinc17-ing, sheet metal working, or assemblyare notbeyond the reach o± current tecimology, butare only at early stages of development.

Many of the chief R&D problems for FMSinvolve logistics: design and layout_ for_ theFMS; and computer control strategies t;,.atcan handle ,sophisticated combinations ofpowerful machine tools. In addition, there isa need for more. in simulationsystems for the FMS s. chat their efficiencycan be opliinized.

. There are a var;aiT of enhancements to FMShardware be oil the horizon. Inaddition toall os the developments describedunder the individual techriole4tes,_ these in-clude automatic delivery and Changing -of c_ut-tins,r tools, and systems for automatic fixturingand defixti.71Ing of material to be prOcessed.

9 3

82 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

Improving the reliability and versatility ofmaterials handling systems is alSo an

in_impor-

tant need for FMS. As entiOned_earlier,_thelevel of sophistication in materials handlingtechnology often does not match that of otherP-A_ technologies._ and the AMH system maybe the "weak link" in the FMS.

Computer-Integrated ManufacturingComputer- integrated mar-ifacturing receives

'substantial attention in industry discussionsand trade journals, though there is relativelYlittle active R&D at this level of the comput-erized factory. This is at least partly becausethere is not yet substan.'.-.,Ildemand fat- CIMsystems. GE and IBM havebegun to work oncomputer-integrated manufacti :ring, as havesome Japanese firms; particUlarll Hitachi, anda coalition of laboratories in West Germanyand Norway; The Automated ManufacturingResearch Facility_ at __NBS is perhaps_ thelargest test bed fbr CIM techniques. It isdescribed in more detail in chapter 8.

Af.; with FMS, one of the key issues in CIMdevelopment involves the logistics of a COM=plicated factory. Several groups, includingNBS, the U S. Air Force ICAl T_projnct, andComputer-Aided Manufacturing International(CAM-I), hive been working en " architec-tureti" for such an automated factory. Figure10 is an example of such a conceptual fra..tie-work for CIM which forms the foundation fordetailed work on factory control architectures..

One of NBS's major contributions in auto-mation R&D has been in developing strategiesfOr the interfac-, f programmable a:atomatitindeviceS. Their emphasis has be-mon what theycall a "mailbox" or de;entralized approach tofactory communication and control. in sucha system. the control of the factory is_ditribzused at different levels among the various PAdevices (see fig. 10). For Px.lirrAple, a factory-level computer filight, send a message to a pro-duction-level computer -- "Make 150 of partnumbor 302570." The prbduCtion-level com-puter would then send a message to the "mail-box- of a certain Work. celli=="Execu;;e produc-tion plan for p(Irt 302570, 150 times." In turn;

the work cell contr. ol ler 7/;..;-..t_id send messagesto the mailbox of tlio tools and rootsin the cell. to execute certain programs storedin their memory.

_

The 'mailbox" approach differs from a cen-tralized, or "Star," approach to automated sys-tems control in which a central computer di-rectly controls each action of every machinein the factory. The advantages of the mailboxsystem are that it simplifies standards and in-torface problems--the only interface standardnecessary is for the location of the mailbox inwhich to deposit messages. This allows onerobot to be substituted for another; for exam=ple, with relative ease. The mailbox approachallows different PA devices to operate usingdiii rent languages and proprietary operatingsystems; as long as they are able to interpretmessages from the computer controller.

Hierarchical arrangements for automatedmanufacturing, such -as those illustrated i z fig-ure 10, tend to involve a large number of sep-arate computers; each with separate databases. Techniques for "distributed data basemanagement." that is; managing and manip-ulating data in several computer systeniSsimultaneously. need to be developed in orderfor a hierarchical arrangement to be practical.Sim;larly; techniques and standards for estib-lishing communication between computeri zedenvices; both in-plant and between plants;need to become much more soplqsticated.

A group of researchers at Purdue I.Jriiversi-ty, in collaboration with ;-:,:,veral largeitiarit,;fac.urers. is attempting mac: e7ploit currenq-T

techholog3 to deslr-. an acc al fat:.tory with maximum computer integration.The leader of that r.ffort argues tb ti-ch-nolog,y for CIM is aveilable, and that tochricaladvances, though weizome, are not ti,,cAss:,ry.Rather. he ::_rgtr?s i hat factors holdi;., ;Itack"fnl/y" automated manuf-ct ming aye primarily:

1, the lack of standards for interfaces, cur-munication networksi and programinglarguagee;

2. a ,teed for more Pi Wei fill data-base man-agement system-

3. the need for L.tailed mathematical

Managementinformation

system

Ch. 3Programmable Automation Technologies 83

Figure 10.NBS Scheme for Distributed Factory Control

-)31

:$;1..$

Criers

Shopcontrol

L

Processplanning

Partdesign

_Peftrt

.$jco..., 1

I/O -

IFoedbackprrICPCSOr

Machinework

siation

Ma erialhandling

work!anon

flo.neryxdo-4---1......,

Feedbackprocessor

Riit$ot sensors

S C

Machinetool

1

S C

Robot

Ht I !1.1. 111111'

models of pnysical and chenuual proc-esseS:

4. shortages of technical personnel;5. shortages of computer power; and6. manufacturing management who are

unaware of the detailed technical benefitsof automation.37

Technical Trends and Bar, :n.s:Cross-Cutting issues.

The following issues are not primefily con-nected to a particular automation tech.nology,

T. Williams. Purdue Laboratory for Applied !,:thIstrial Con-trol. "Information Systems Technology and i °motion: ItsPr-sent 1)ay Status and _a Prognosis," paper developed_c-- toAmerican Society _ of Mechanical Engineers Winter Anne..Meeting. 13oston. Nov. 15. 1983.

Conveyor

S C

110

but rather have a large potential impact on thecurrent and future capabilities of automationtechnologies as a whole;

Art;ficial Intelligence*

Artificial intelligence (AI) is a loose con-glomeration of research areas united by thecommon goal of designing machines which canperform tasks we would generally regard asrequiring intelligence It is significant for pro-gramniabl- -.1itomation because many expertslook to AI techniques as the key to automat-ing parts of the manufacturing process here-

'A- forthcoming OTA report, "Information Technology Re-search and Development," will discuss artificial intelligence inmore detail,

0

84 Computerized Manufa:twing AutOmation: Employment. Education. and the Workp!ace

tofore thought to he too complex for autorna,tion.

The core of basie, long-term AI research in-cludes work on imparting such intelligentcharacteristics as learning, reasoning andplanning to es:impute-it. Building on some ofthis work are several more applied researchareas: the most sophisticated end of the robot:ics field; the development of systems fe- in.age processing=deciphering images from vi,rk.-To

cameras or touch sensors; devehrT.-, t-.:r.'piques_ to allow the computer . lei-Standnatural language (e.g., English, as Apposed tocomputer languages such as FORTRAN),both written and spoken; and expert Systems,programa which can; through a sophisticatednetwork of rules, advise or make decisions in

specific Situations much as a human expertwould.

While robotica and sensors (image Under-standing) have been largely covered elsewherein the chapter, natiiral_language and expertsystems both have significant potential ap-plicationa for manufacturing in this decade.

Commercial sYaterna for processing bothwritten and spoken language have receivedsubstantial attention in the past 5 years. Thehope for both kinds of systems i.4 e hat, byallowing people to give commands com-municate With computers in everyday lan-guage, widespread use of the computer will be

substantially easier. Fewer-people-WOu1d_needto learn specialized computer languages, andfewer co,ripiiter experts would be needed as intermediaries between computers and thosewho wish to use the computer as a tool.

The primary application fcr compt,:,,er proc.-essing of written language has been in the de-velopment of So-calledjiatural langu4 front

6'7 mends for data-basarag,.-ment systems(DBMS). In such a system, the data basee.g t sales ;:ecords for a companyand theDBMS itself used to Manipulate and sum-marize that data; remain essentially the same:However, the natural language "front end"allows users to type quectiona in relativelyfree-form English, and translates those ques-

tions into the specialized language used by theDBMS:

For example; witheiit a natural languagefront end; a plant manager who sought theanswer to the question, "Which products inthe 2000 series were sold in volumes of morethan 1;000 last year?" Would probably referthe question to a programer, who would writea short program in a computer language toprocess the reqUeat.* With a natural languagefeature added to the DBMS; that plant man=ager could type his request;more or less eX=

actly as he would say it; into a compUter ter-mirial, and the requested information wouldappear on the screen.

In general, thetigh, scientists have foundnatural language understanding to be a muchgreater challenge than originally expected.Because there are So many ambiguities andunclear references; tindeistanding everydaylanguage requires substantial informationabout the context :f a given statement orquestion, and tiv_ :World in general. Organiz-ing such information to allow natural languageUnderstanding by computer has proven to bean extreniely difficult task. in part because ofour very incomplete unclei.-:;. mding of howpeople store and manipulate s:Ich information:

practice, this means that constructing anatural language front end fo a DBMS re-quires weeks or months of work in writingcode that seta forth for the mnputer the vari-ous meanings of the terms used fcir a particu-lar application, and the possible ways they canbe crwnhirie,!.. Although many such systemsCa" ?lativelY free-form questions;the verely constricted in subject

tli? Same syt:;' em whichcan .L estiona about a flares salescannot decipher rjtierieS about the design ofits products:

*In one DBMS lariguage. such a (very Misr, . ^' program might

look like:OPEN SALES83:FIND ALLFIND PRODNO GT 1999 AND LT 3000FIND SALESVOL GT 1000LIST PRODNO. SALESVOL

Systems for computer processing of spokenlanguage present a different set of problems.These involve techniques for analyzing theelectronic sic,nals produced by a human speak-ing into a microphone, and comparing themto signal patterns stored in computer memory.Voice recognition systems have been devel-oped which are capable of interpreting perhaps100 words, spoken distinctly and usually bya speaker to which the system has been"trained" to listen. Such systems can be used,for example; to allow workers to give the com-puter simple commands when they do nothave a hand free to use a keyboard. Variousother uses have been proposed for such sys-tems, from directing the motions of a robot tooperating a CAD system; although the limitedvocabulary and lack of flexibility of such sys-tems has hindered widespread use; Rapid ad-vances in hardware and software for voicerecognition may expand their capabilities inthe next few years.

Both for written and spoken language under-standing systems; the limited breadth andflexibility of applications is a consistenttheme. In fact; a general solution to the prob-lems of natural language understandinge.g.,one that could impart to a computer the lan-guage understanding capabilities of a 5-year-old child is probably at least two decades off;

Finally, expert systems can allow the use ofcomputers in situations normally thought tobe so complex that they require human judg-ment or "intuition." AI researchers havefound that in a narrowly defined problem area,it is sometimes possible to simulate much ofthe judgment of human experts by breakingdown that judgment into hundreds of rules forthe information to look for under different cir-cumstances, and how to weigh that informa-tion.

Expert systems are typically unposed ofhundreds of rules; gathered by painstaking in-terviewing of human experts, about exactlyhow they make their judgments. The interviewand development process for an expert system

- typically takes several years to complete,although it is becoming less time-consuming

Ch 3Programmable Automation Technologies 85

as techniques for developing the systemsbecome more refined; The interview tech-niques used by expert system developers allowthe systems to capture many of the subtletiesof how an expert arrives at judgments;

Two of the classic expert systems, for ex-ample, are "Dipmeter Advisor," developed bySchlumberger to offer advice on oil geology,and Stanford's MYCIN, which advises doctorson antibiotic drug treatment. Figure 11 is anexcerpt from the rules upon which the MYCINsystem is based. The system asks the doctora series of questions about the patient, andthen_offers a diagnosis and treatment (see fig.12). It can explain the rules it used to arriveat its recommendation; and physicians canalso improve the system by adding new rules;

Some of the more recent applications of ex-pert systems; closer to manufacturing, are asystem which guides mechanics in the repairof locomotives (Delta/CATS-1; developed byGE), and a system which helps configurecomplex computer systems (XCON; formerly"R-1," developed by Carnegie-Mellon Univer-sity and Digital Equipment Corp;);

Though the commercialization of expert sys-tems is only beginning, many industrialistshave high hopes for their use in manufactur-ing. A myriad of applications have been pto-posed; including systems which could mimicthe performance of a human machinist; sys-tems for advising designers and preventingdesign errors; systems which would act as alinkage between manufacturing and design

Figure 11.Sample Rule from the MYCINExpert System

Rule 27If 1) the gram stain of the organism is gram

negative; and2) the morphology of the organism is rod,

and3) the aerobicity of the organism is

anaerobic;Then: There is suggestive evidence (0.7) that

the identity of the organism isBacteriodes .

SOURCE' 13,_Dayls__ang CRich,Expert_Systems: Fundamentals,tutorial at 1983 conference of the American Associationfor Artificial Intelligence.

16 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, EducatiOn, and the Workplace

Figure 12;Sample "Advice" From the MYCINExpert System

Flec 1) My preferred therapy recommendation is asfollows:

In order to cover for items <1 3 4 5 6 >:Gives GENTAMICINDose: 128 mg (1.7mg/kg) q8h IV (or IM) tor 10

daysComments: Modify dose in renal failure

In order to cover :or ItemGive: CHLORAMPHENICOLDose: 563 mg (7.5 mg/kg) q6h for 14 daysComments: Monitor patient's white count

Do you wish to see the next btibibe therapy?NO

SOURCE' R Davis and C. Rich, Ex/' ^W Syslinne; Fundamentals, tutorialat -I E3 :._nri_forante Of tee American Association for ArtificialIntelligence.

data bases; and even systems for overall fac-tory control.

Two researchers describe the characteristicsof a problem area which makes a good domainfor expert systems as one where:38

There are recognized experts; the expertsare provably better than amateurs; the tasktake§ an expert a few minutes to a few hours;the task is primarily cognitive; the Skill is(routinely) taught to neophytes; the task do-main haS 0 high payoff; the task requires nocommon sense.It is unclear in this early stage of applica;

tion of expert systems justhow widely appli-cable these tools will be While the successesto date have been impressiVe, each of the cur-rent systems has beenThe result of many yearsof effort in top AI laboratories. Furthermore,they have succeeded in Very carefully selected,and very carefully restricted problem areas;For example; GE's system for diagnosing loco-motive problems cannot be used to diagnose'Automobiles, or even to diagnose differentbrands or configurations of locomotives with-out major alteratibri.

With current high levels of interest in ex-pert systems, and evolving tools and tech-niques to streamline their development, itseems likely that these toblS Will be used in

s.R. Davis and C. Rich, "Expert Systems: Fundamentals,"tutorial at ArneticiTn_ Association for Artificial Intelligence 1983annual conference, Washington; D.C.; Aug. 22, 1983.

several areas of manufacturing. However; itis unlikely that expert systems will in the nearfuture meet the many expectations which theirrecent successes have generated. It is easyboth to underestimate the development effortand skills needed to construct such tools; aswell as to imagine new applications in areaswhiCh are too broad or ill-defined for currenttechnology to handle.

Sensing this problem, one recent NationalResearch Council committee_ report warned of"unrealistic expectatiOnS:"39

In an extremely narrow context, someexpert systems outperform humans (e.g.,MACSYMA), but certainly no machine ex-hibitS the common sense facility of humans atthis time. Machines cannot outperform hu-mans in a general sense, and that may neverbe possible. Further, the belief that such sys-tem§ will bail out current or impending diSaS;ters in more conventional system develop-ments that are presently under way is almostalways erroneous.One of the dangers of high expectations for

expert systems and other areas of AI is thatif these expectations are unmet; there couldbe a backlash and Joss of interest in AI. Thefield has already suffered from two or moreSuch cycles of high expectations and loss ofinterest and credibility; Indeed, AI has longbeen an area in which claims and hopes aremore prevalent than concrete successes,though current workers in this area seem tobe rather more cautious.

Manufacturers are not alone in their highhopes_ for AI, as evidenced by Japan'S recent"Fifth Generation" computer project, andDOD's new Strategic Computing project.Both of these programs are long-term, ambi-tiouS R&D in computer hardware and softwarein which AI plays a primary-role (also see ch.8). Another major goal of both programs is thedevelopment of "supercomputers." Thoughthe definition of supercomputers changes as

"Committee on Army Robotics and Artificial Intelligence,Manufacturing Studies Board, National Research Council, Ap-plications Of Roboticsand Artificial Intelligence to Reduce Riskand Improve Effertivenees: A Study for the Uhited StatesArmy (Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1983), p. 63.

9s

the technology developS, a current workingdefinition 18 machines that can process morethan 100 million instructions per second. AIand supercomputers tend to be diSeuSsed to-gether and often confused with each other.I lowever. though both AI and supercomput-ers are at the frontiers of computer Science,they are essentially separate research areas atthis time. It is likely; though, that future AIzibolications will require advanced computerarchitecturesnot high-speed number crunch-ers as much as machines designed to processsymbols and logic.

Although the infusion of DOD binds into AImay expand and advarite the field, defense ap-plications may also continue to monopolize thesmall pool of U.S. Al researtherS. Despite thefact that DOD is making concerted efforts toencourage commercial spinoffs frOm the Stra-tegic Computing project, mast of the atten7tion of the AI R&D community will be fOciiSedon military applications rather than corruner,cial manufacturing applications.

Much of the current wave of commercializa-tion of AI 18 based on AI research done asmuch as a decade or More ago. In many cases;commercial applications have recently becomefeasible because of the continuing declines incosts of computing power. While one can ex-pect further improvements in availablebased tools over the next few years, these irn=proyements may be small in comparisori tothis initial harvest. The more fundamentalproblerns of Al; involving natural languagesystems of general applicability, versatile andunstructured machin : vision, andultimate-ly=generally iritelligent; perhaps "learning"machines, are still very much a long-term re-search issue.

Standards and InterfacesThe need for standards in both-languages

and interfaces is strong and consistent through-out programmable automation technologies.Without standards; it is very difficult to com-bine equipment of different vendors, and it ismore difficult to proceed incrementally towardComputer-integrated manufacturing.

The demand for standardization in lan-guages is particularly strong from users of

25 -452 0 84 - Of, 3

Ch. 3Programmable Automation Technologies 87

automation devices, because of the increasedconfusion and need for additional training thatresult from the many different programinglanguages."

More likely than one Standard language formanufacturing, however, may be a seLofstandard languages for each appliCatiOn. Forexample, there might be a standard languagefor arc-welding robots, another for materialshandling systems. These could be either formany adopted or de facto standards (i.e., theybecome commonly accepted through usage orthrough the influence of major vendors orusers in the field); For example, many ofIBM's products and techniques are treated asstandards because the company has dorni;rutted the computer field. However, domitia;tion by a single firm in programmable auto;nation systems is not as likely (see ch. 7). Inaddition, DOD has created many de factostandards, APT among them; through its pro-curement practices; It remains to be seen towhat extent DOD's latest attempt at a stand-ard computer language, ADA; will be appli-cable to manufacturing systems.

In addition to standards for programing lan-guageS, standards for interfaces between com-puterized deviees will greatly facilitate inte-grated PA Systems. The recent developmentof standar& for "loeal area networks;" initial-ly aimed to connect personal computers in of-fices, may also be useful in the factory." Suchstandards define the hardware connections forhooking devices together, as well as the "pro-tocols" that ensure that different systems caninterpret each others' messages. However; thecontent of those messages depends on the ar-chitecture of the factoryi.e., the differentlevels of control and the kind of infOrmationit is necessary to communicate. AS di§etiSsedearlier, efficient architectures for integratedfactories are only-beginning to be worked outin manufacturing laboratories such as theAutomated Manufacturing Research Facilityat NBS.

"DTA automation technology Workshop. May 29. -1983.""Local Area Network Facilitates Factory Automation,"

Tooling and Production. May 1983. p. 94. These networks arebased on a professional assotiation-developed Standard knownas IEEE807i

d :1

88 Compotert.'ed Mdoo lactating Automation: Employment, Education; and the Workplace

nufacturors and others oftenargue thattireiiiitt Lite stand:trdization will Stifle innova-tion. It can tend to "freeze" a technology at

particular point in its develepinent, and dis-oottritgo further innovations which may be in-Consistent with the standard. In addition;there is sometimes a strategic concern thatstandard languages cause more competitionby permitt ing easier combination of PA de_-vices from clifferentmainifacturers. One NBSofficittl has argued that parts of the computer-ized controllers for machine tools; for exam-ple; are technically ripe for standardization butthe machine tool Manufacturers do not seem

_It) support such a move.Apart from any resistance to standards.

there is t he fact that impletriehtation of stand-ards is voluntary in the United States; whichis not the case in many Other countries. As aresult, development of a successful standardttikesyears of negotiaticiii among manufactur-ers and users: To cOMplicate matters. recentcow decisions" have held organizers of stand-ards efforts liable if a standard can be shownto hurt_ a particular corripany._This has madeprogress toward adoption of standards inmany areas even more cautious and slow -going:

_

N I IS staffers contribute to standards effortsby serving on and helping _CO coordinate themany private sector_ standards committeesworking on automation- issues. Relevant ef-forts are being conducted by the Electronic In-dustries Association, the Robotic IndustriesAssociation; the American National Stand-attls Institute; the American Society for Testi.ing and MateriaLs, the Institute of Electricaland Electronic Engineers, and the Interna-tional Standards Organization.

_

"R. ttocken. NHS. personal communication. Aug. 12. 198:3:

For example, some NC controllers -only understand Si numberto he "two." if it is written as "2" . Others require it_to_be writ-

ten as "2.000" or "2.E00",This cari-caUSe difficulty in trying

to move programs- from one machine to anather, even if themachines_ ostensibly iise the same language._

"1 'I n fleTiCan Si wiet v of Engine(Ts v 1 tydrolev-

i,1 Corp. 102 S. Ct. 19;5 119821. the Supreme Court held thatzt st :truizird-sett Mg organization was liable hit- the antitrust viola-

tions of pztrticipantS in the standards-making- processprocess when they

acted with the' apparent inithority of the ASNIE.

Human FaCtors ResearchIh the past few years; makers of all corn:

puterized equipment have become aware of aneed to design systems for optimal usefulnessand productivity for their human operators.'Phere are various terms used to describe thefocus of such efforts: "user itiondlyiqualitieSand "man-machine interface," for example.*In part to help market their equipment; com-puter manufactiiters have found that there _hiesteps they Can take to improve the human fee=tors aspects. Huinan factors experts arguethat research and testing of the effectiVene§§of a prodtiet intiSt be undertaken throughoutits deSign cycle. "Human engineering, WhiChwas seen as the paint put on at the end of aproject, is becoming the steel frame on whichthe structure is built.""

Although many experts agree on the impor-tance of huinan facterS, it has often been aneglected topic _in research. It is frequentlyregarded as too basic for industry to exEunine,and too applied- for university research efforts.Although DOD has pursued man-machine in-teractieri research for decades; only recentlyhas human factors become a subject Of sys-tematic study outside of DOD; PsyCliolegiStShaVe developed testing procedures to helpdetermine the human effectiveneS§ of differentdesigns. Recently, human factors of computersysteniS has become a strong and growingsubfield of cognitive psychology.

Designers_ of prograr. mable automationequipment have lagged behind the trendtoward concern about human factors in com-puterized systems, in part because of thenewness and small size of the market for manyautomation devices. In addition; some PA de-vices such as robots or portions of FMSs areoften designed with the intention of minimalcontact with humans.° Several systems de-

A variety of terms are used by researchers-and industry todescrilie hiiitiati factors and related_subjects. Some Others notmentioned in this section include software psycheIngY, userscience and human-computer Interaction.

"B: Shnoiderman. "Fighting for the Us-er," ASI'SDecember 1982. 29:

"H. M. ParSons and G. Kearsley. "Human FaCtors andRobotics: Current Status and Future Prospects." HumanResources Research Organization, October 1981.

signers have noted; in_fact; that the systemswit h the worst human factors seem to be thosewhich were_designed to be unmanned; but laterdetermined _to need_ an operator_ or monitor.Computer-aided design is somewhat differentfrom other PA technologies in this respect,Because of the larger size of the market andthe recent attempts to develop lower cost sys-tems for noncomputer users, CAD designershave begun to pay attention to designing sys-tems that operators can use more easily andproductively.

There are essentially two levels of humanfactors research. The first, sometimes_ knownas "ergonomics," aims to make people morephysically comfortable_ and productive whileworking at a machine. For example, it includesresearch on the ideal levels_ of light, color ofdisplay screen, size and configuration of key-board, etc. A second level looks at more fun-damental questions in "human-machine inter-face," such as how to distribute control be-tween operator_ and machine,_ how to designsoftware for optimum productivity, and howto haximize operator satisfaction. Most suchwork has been directed toward general pur-pose computers or word processors ratherthan programmable automation."

These research areas are related to largerquestions in industrial psychology and man-agement concerning less tangible issues suchas the impact of technology on the work envi-ronment and/or on the design of jobs. Therehas been little systematic work in the UnitedStates in these areas; although there is sub-stantial research in some European coun-tries."

"There has been substantial work. however, in the design ofsystems for teleoperatorsremote mampulatois controlled bya hutnan operator. Stich work is often aimed for ultimate ap-plications in unmanned space missions or underseas, handlingof radioactive material, or battlefield applications: See; for ex-ample. T. N. Sofyanos and T. B. Sheridtuvad_Assessment ofI Indefsea Teleoperators (Cambndge, Mass.: MIT gea Grant Col-lege Program. June 1980).

"See. for example. H. H. Rosenbrock, Professor of ControlEngineering, University of Manchester (U.KJ_ Institute ofScience and Technology, "Robots and People," Measurementand Control, March 1982. pp. 105-112: P. Brbdner and T. Mar-tin. "Introduction of New Technologies into Industrial Produc-tion in F. R. Germany and its Social EffectsMethods: Results;

Ch. 3Programmable Automation Technologies 89

SensorsThe vast majority of programmable automa-

tion devices are limited in their capabilitiesbecause they are "unaware" of their environ-ment. To use anthropomorphic terms, they donot "know" what they are doing, exactlywhere their parts are, or whether somethingis wrong in the manufacturing process.* Thisproblem is especially acute when manufactur-ers hope to use PA devices to perform tasksnormally performed by people. A minor ad-justment or observation which would be easyand obvious for a humane.g., righting a partwhich arrived upside-downis nearly impossi-ble with most current robots.

Hence, computerized devices that can ac-quire information about the environment area lively area of inquiry. While many of thesedevices are used in conjunction with robots,they can also be used with other CAM equip-mente.g., NC machine tools or AMH sys-temsor independently. There are roughlythree categories of applications for sensor sys-tems: 1) inspection; in which parts or iiroductsare examined and evaluated according to pre-ftablished criteria; 2) identification; in which

parts; products or other objects are classifiedfor purposes of sorting or further processing;and 3) guidance and control; in which sensorsprovide feedback to robots or other CAM de-vices on their position and the state of the partor product.

One can simplify the range of sensor tech-nologies by dividing the devices into threeclasses according to their complexity. Whileall of the devices are used for guidance -and

Lessons Learned; and Future PlariL" PrOCeetrings_of tire EighthTrienntal World Congress of the International Federation ofAutomatic Control, Kyoto. Japan, Aug. 24-28, 1981, pp.3433-3445;_Swedish Work Environment Fund, Programme ofActivities and Budget; 1981/82-1983/84. For further detail see

*There are some exceptions where PR devices do have signifi-cant information about their environment. One obvious excep-tion is the Coordinate Measuring Machine: built specifically tomeasure the dimensions of objects. Another is in factories whichcode each part, for -example. with optical co-des similaz to thoseused on groceries. Optical code readers at each machine can iden-tify the part in process. Finally, many PA devices do have in-ternal sensors. For example robots and machine tools have sen-sors which provide feedback on the positions of their joints.

90 Comoulerri:M lcidnolacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

control applications, usually only the mostcomplex (i.e., vision and touch sensors)_ canhandle inspection and ideritifiCation tasks.

The simplest devices provide binary infor-matione.g., a weight sensor; photocell, orsimple electrical switch can indicate whethera Part is or is not present. These simple sen-sors are relatively cheaR technologically ma-ture and easy to implement; They are alreadyused widely in manufacturing equipment, andtheir use will undoubtedly continue to growfor applications in which binarY informationis useful.

At a moderate level of complexity; the infor-mation sensed is analog (continuously vary-ing). For example, a proximity sensor can de-termine the distance of an object. A popularproximity .sensor used as a safety device or.industrial robots is the same as the one usedon Polaroid SX-70 cameras. It caleulates dis-tance_ by emitting inaudible sound waves andcalculating how long they take to betince offthe closest object and return. For Safety pur-poses, these can be used to stop the motionof the robot if a human enters its "work enve-lope." Other sensors in this moderate level ofcomplexity include devieeS which can electro-mechanically sense force and torque e.g.,- ina robot arm or a inachirie tool spindle. Thesecan be used; for example, to allow a robot grip-per to apply just enough fere& to a delicate ob-ject; Finally, many devices for measurementfall into the moderate-complexity category.Optical sensors, for example, can be used tomonitor the diameter of a driveshaft on alathe, or -for noncontact sensing of the dimen-sions of hot metal as it emerges from forgingprocesses.

Most of these moderately complex sensingtechniques are fairly WelVdeveloped, and canbe applied relatiVely easily albeit with somecustomization. There is a moderate amount ofR&D under way to increase the quality of in-formation from these devices (e.g.; their sen-sitivity_ and_ Speed), and to increase their rangeof applicability (e.g., development of sensorsfor measuring arbitrary prismatic shapeS_onmachine tools). In addition; the coordination

of these sensors with each other and withCAM tools is a very difficult problem. Com-puter scientists are attempting to developprocessing techniques that can quickly inter-pret force and torque data from the Variousjoints of a rabot, for eitample, pad providefeedback to the robot's controller.

At the most sophisticated end 'of the sens-ing techniques, visual and touch sensors dealwith information that is not only analog butalso needs substantial processing to be useful.Vision and touch sensing teehnologies are onlyin their infancy, and haVe just_begun to havepractical uses in the factory. Of the two, vi-sion by far receives the most attention.

The chief technical problem in machinevision systems is in interpreting_the picturesgenerated by a video camera. In a typicalvision system, a framei.e.; one complete im-age frozen in time is typically composed of256 by 256 picture elements, orpixels. If eachpixel is either black or white, then there aremore than 65,000 bits of infermation that thecomputer program must process. In general,the steps in the process include:48

Segrnentation,The areas of the imagemust be clarified and divided into seg-ments or "blobs," representing the fea-tures of the object and its background.There are two general schemes for begin-ning the interpretation of the data. Onemakes use of discontinuitiesprimarilydetecting the edges of the object in theimage. The_ other approach relies on simi-larities in the image, i.e.; areas of the im-age that are of Similar intensity.Recognition.-=-The system must comparethe features (segments) it has identifiedwith those stored in its memory, attemptto find an object in its memory that issuitably close to the one in the image, andhence label the object and its features.Interpretation. This step varies depend-ing on the machine vision application. For

4".J. M. Wright. "Vision of the Future. unpublished manu-script, Carnegie-Mellon University Robotics Institute, January1983.

102

Ch. 3Programmable Automatior. Technologies 91

robot guidance, the interpretation stepmight be to identify the object, then cal-culate its coordinates so that the robotcan grasp it. For an inspection applica-tion, the interpretation of the imagemight be to determine whether the objecthas the right dimensions or is free ofdefects.

In the vast majority of current vision VS;tems, each_picture element in the 25643y=256

imageeachpicture

. . . _element image is either black or white. In moreadvanced systems just beginning to be usedin industry, each pixel can be one oF severalshades of gray. These systems, often called"gray-scale," are potentially more powerful intheir ability to identify objects and cope withuneven lighting, but they also require muchmore computer pctwer and algorithms for proc-essing data which are only beginning to beworked out. Systems for processing color im-ages are another order of magNtude more

complex, and there is no active work on suchSystems yet.

The systems described above essentiallyprovide 2-D information, although certaintricks can be used to infer the 3-D character-istics of an object. Some researchers have usedmore than one camera in order to obtain 3-Dinformation much as the human eye does,though such schemes are in very early stages.One very promising method to obtain 3-D in-formation is the use of "light striping" sys-tems. In such a system, a laser or other lightsource flashes a very precise band of light ontoan object, and the camera records the imageat that instant. By examining how such struc-tured light bends over a 3-D object, the-sys-tem can infer the dimensions and distance ofthe object.

Current machine vision is in a very earlystage. The range of objects that can be iden-

awg

Photo credit: Nationiii Bureau or Standards

_ "Light striping" system can determine the shape of_a 3.1:1 part by flaShing a very precise line of lightffi.om slots on right,below gripper) and photographing how that light is bent by the object. TV monitor shows view of camera above gripper

103

92 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

tified, the speed of the interpretation, and thesusceptibility of the systems to lighting prob-lems and minor variations in texture of objectsare all examples of serious problems with cur-rent technology. Successful applications ofcurrent machine vision technology tend to bevery specific, ad hoc solutions, often usingclever "tricks" or manipulations of the manu-facturing environment. As one report notes,"The vision Systems of today, and those forthe rest of the decade will not promise greatgenerality. These sorts of tricks will be an im-portant part of the field for many years tocome. "'s Nevertheless, many useful applica-tions are possible with existing technology andmachine vision is currently a rapidly growingfield. In certain specific applications, especial-ly very t&dious tasks such as inspection of elec-tronic circuit boards, machinevision systemscan outperform humans.

An example of a successful maclune visionapplication is ShoWn in figure 13. Here; a sys-tem developed by Octek Corp. counts stacksof cups priOr to packaging. The system first"grabs" an image from its camera under con-trolled lighting conditions; defines the edgesof the cups, attempts to eliminate shadimsand other confusing data; and counts_ thenumber of cup lips. Similar programs havebeen developed to inspect cassette tapes andcircuit boards.5°

While there is considerably less research et=fort under way on touch sensors; there are Sevr..eral grOupS of researchers; for example, work-ing on a touch sensor baied on a Carbon-impregnated rubber pad whiCli changes itselectrical conductivity under pressure. Thispad could be attached to a robtit'S gripper, andit would send to the computer processor an im-age or "footprint" of the object being grasped.Once this image has been obtained, inter-preting it involves virtually the identical proc-ess used for vision processing: --

"Ibid.'°D. L. Hudson and J. D. Trombly, "Developing Industrial

Applications for Machine vision," Computers MechanicalEnguieering, vel. 1, April 1983, pp. 18-23. _Note that this ap-plication of machine vision, like many inspection applications,is not used in connection with a robot.

Figure 13.-=Machine Vision Process

Two steps In a machine vIslokpreideSS_developed to cosint sttccksof paper cups for a cup manufaCtUrer; The cups are Ilt_by a highlydirectional fiber optics light source, which makes_their _edges standout. The top photo shows part of the system's segmentation process,In which it assesses the intensify of light for eachcup lip. The bottomphoto indicates the interpretation function, In which the system hascounted the number of cups In the stack. Note the shadows andrelative unevenness of light which complicate even this simplemachine vision application.

SOURCE: Octek cr.

There seem to be two schools of thought onsensors for industrial robots. One argues that,if enough care is taken in organizing the man-ufacturing environment, complex sensors areunnecessary. Parts can be carefully fixturedso they are in the proper orientation and posi-tion, and sensors in the simple or moderatelevels of complexity will suffice. The otherpoint of view is that robots should be able toadapt to the chaos of manufactUring, andshould ideally have senoesvision, in partic-ularwhich rival thoSe of a human.

Materials TrendsJ

Plastics, ceramics, and composite§ are re-placing metals in a wide variety of products

104

at an increasing rate; This trend is both corn-plein'(,,ntar,, to and problematic for increaseduse of ei-tain PA devices.

These new materials technologies, on thewhole, fit well into an environment of comput-er-integrated manufacturing; Injection mold-ing of plastics; for instance; is by nature anautomated process and adapts easily to inte-gration with other computer-controlled de-vices; _I t is thus possible to create a "flexiblemanufacturing system" for plastics at leastas easily as for metals.* Similar systems arealso possible -for producing parts from new-

technology "fine grain ceramics," which havestrength_ comparable to that of metal (at a frac-tion of the weight); are immune to corrosion;and do not have the britile qualities that oneexpects from ordinary ceramics.

*( Me hitch in creating an FMS for plastics is in developingdie-; it he metal forms into which molten plastic is injected) whichin programmable" or easily changed. Several researchers are

currently working on this problem.

Ch. 3Programmable Automation Technologies

These trends and others mean that theamount of metal-removing activity is going todecrease; Thus; there is some chance that useof plastics and ceramics will eventually renderobsolete some new metalcutting equipment.This possibility has not yet been examinedsystematically by the metalworking communi-ty. Robots, because of their flexibility; are lesslikely to be affected than machine tools; How-ever, there are certain factors that tend tomake widespread obsolescence of new metal-working equipment unlikely, First, metalwork-ing machines have useful lives of 30 years ormore,_ and the users of this equipment movenotoriously slowly in replacing machine tools;As new materials technologies do reduce theamount of metalworking, it is the vast stockof older, manual machine tools that is likelyto be useless rather than the newer equipment.Second, it is expected to take at least two d

for ceramics to displace a significantamount of metalworking.

Future of the TechnologiesCapabilities

Building on the "Trends and Barriers" sec-tion of this chapter, tables 11 through 15 sum-marize the main problems for PA technologiesand the projected times for solution. Thoughthese projections must be considered extreme-ly tentative, they provide a sense of the rela-tive scale and complexity of the problems.

Because the amount of time between labora-tory solution of a problem, first prototype ap-plications, and the widespread and easy avail-ability of that solution is signifit :int, the- tablesinclude a separate estimation of each. Projec-tions for applications and availability are evenrougher than the projection for a technical so-lution, since they depend on many social, eco-nomic, and market conditions.

These projections were compiled by analysisof existing sets of projections5' and by inter-views with technology experts. Projections oftechnological developments are inherently con-troversial, and experts do not always agree.Some experts will view these estimates aseither too optimistic or too pessimistic. Dur-ing the interviews with technology specialists,-for example, several pointed out that some ofthe "key problems" listed in the table may

"See. for example, Manufacturing Studies Board, NationalResearch Council, Applications of Robotics and Artificial In-telligencatto Reduce Risk and Improve EffecUveness: A Studyfor the United States Army (Washington. D.C.: NationalAcademy Press. 1983): R. E. Garrett and R. M. Mueller. 'Stra-tegic Analysis/Technology Trend Report." Control Data Corp.,May 15. 1981; D. Grossman and J. T. Schwartz. !The NextGeneration of RoLioLs,' in Frontiers in Science and Technology(Washington. D.C.: National Academy of Sciences. 1983). pp.185-209.

94 Co,nputerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment; Education, and the Workplace

Table 11.CAD: Projections for Solution of Key Problems

Hardware:1. High-resolution, color display of

with rapid generation of images°Both hardware anc: soft ware:2 Low-cost, powerful microcomputf

workstations fort)a) electronics designb) mechanical design .....

3 Independent CAD workstations Iiiby Petwori<,_with access to supercornpbler for powerful analysis aisimulation

Sotto-rare: ..4. Threediitiensional solid modeling

systems, resultind in:"a) more-realistic imagesb) enhanced ability Jo connect

Manufacturing equipment..5 Comprehensive, powerful comput

engicieering systems d for mechandesign .. . ..... ........

6: Extensive design/manufacturingintegrations

, Current (1984) 1985416 1987.90_ 91.2000 2001 and beyond

lesigns,a

rbased

I. .. , . . .

iked4 I

Idii I

. . ......with

anaided4 I

'calM

A 4

awhile color displays are currently availabLO.._thetenctloaecrifice either resolution (the fineness and clarity or the picture) or-the speed with which _the_i_rnages can

appear _on the Sereem_New techniques for displays, such as the use of dedicated microprocessor chips (sometimes termed "silicon engines") to generate images,

promise to ...... this situation.°Microcomputer.based workstal ions tor CAaare no.w_lbeing_marketectbut -in -the Judgment of technical experts consulted by OTA, they are either not powerful enough

andkor not_i_no_i_periSive_ enough to taeuset.il in a wide variety of applications.cCAD experts report that many systems for 30 solid modeling are evailableriow bultrieV_Are_not_ being used because of their large appetite for computer power. and

because their rapacity to link design data tamanutaeturIng_eguipmentisinadgqvate. Part (b) of this entry refers to this ability to store and manipulate design data--about the physical CharacteriStiCe_at a_ paq_in_such_awey that It can be transmitted to manufacturing equipment with only_minimal iritermedlate_steps,_

dims erilry enough to allow extensive Interactive testing, simulatiori and d-refinement of designs Ina_Witier_ange_otapprieations. Such systems

are strongly productdependent; while they may be near available for certain prodUcte now le g., Integrated circuits, certain portions of aircraft and motor vehicles).

they are much less advanced in other lndistries_and.apptidationt°This entry denotesine 'win_dow_frormdesign_to production" which would. for'nodule°, allow-designers -to-exarnine the_production implicahons_ot_desiv_nehoices.These include.the costs and necessary production processes, as well as the histdry of manutactuiing similar items at the plant. Such comprehensive connectionswould allow much more substantial integiation of CAD, CAM. and CompUter.base management.

solution in laboratoriesa- first _comme!eiakillaPlications.

solution widely and easily available (riquiring minimal custom engineering or each application).

SOURCE OTA analysis and compilation of data a from technology experts.

never be solved at allthe development ofstandard languages for robots (table 12 item10) for example; depends as much on marketfactors and political considerations among ro=bet vendors and users as it dOes on technicalissues. Similarly; development of artificialintelligence-based systems which could controlmuch of a factory withobt human intervention(table 15; item. 5) depend) on fundamental ad-vances in the field Of artificial intelligence thatare by no means assured.

On the other hand, it is possible that SOineof the advances in the accompanying tablesmay occur significantly faster than the tablesindicate. This might be particularly likely if

the Federal Government and/or industry wereto choose to make dramatic increases in R&Dfunding for PA technologieS. Chapter 8 dis-cusses R&D funding in more detail.

However, industry observers report withvirtual unanimity that the application of pro-grammable automation in most industries islagging significantly behind the technologies'development and that there appear to beabundant, relatively easy opportunities for useof current automation technologies. Hence themain stumbling blocks in the near future forimplementation Of PA technologies are nottechnical, but rather are barriers of cost; or-ganization Of the ,factory, availability of ap-

Hardware:1. Lightweight, -comb

new forms of drivBoth hardware and Si2.Force sensors .3 Versatile touch se4, Coordinated multi5. Flexible, versatile

Software:.6.Precise path plan

control with CAD7.3-D vision in struc

which have beenvision task

8.3-D vision in unstrenvironments whiplanned to simplif

9.Robust mobility inenvironments ....

10. Standards clarifyinof robot languagesa common languaapplications

- solution in laboratories_- first commercial applications.PI- solution widely and easily available (requiring minimal custom engineering for each application).

Ch. 3Programmable Automation Technologies 95

Table 12.Robotics: Projections for Solution of Key Problems

Current (1984) 1985-86 198790 1991.2000 2001 and beyond

)osite structures andmechanisms a

)ft ware:A I

nsors . Ipie arms agrippers

ling, simulation and

1111

............... ......tured environmentsslanned to simplify the

uctured complex

I

:h have not beeny the vision taskunstructured

a

.............g different versions

and helping ensurere for similar

11

I I 1

SOURCE: OTA analysis and compilation of data from technology experts.

Table 13.NC Machine Tools: Projections for Solution of Key Preblerlia

Current (1984) 1985-86 1987-90 1991.2000 1_2001_ and bPyortd_Hardware:1. Systems which can automatically and

reliably remove a wide variety of metalchips produced in cuttings i i

Both hardware and software:2. Reliable, widely applicable adapti've

control to optimize speed of metalremoval -

.

3. Tool wear Sensors applicable to Widerange of cutting tools .......... E

4. Systems for measurement of parts of avariety of shapes and sizes while theparts are being machined 4 1

Software:5. Controllers to accommodate ties to robots a 1 16. Model-based machining in which the

machine tool operates substantiallyautomatically based on data aboutmetal processes and the part to be.

- produced I i7. Wideiy applicable 3-D verification of NC

programs using CAD-based simulations ..aSystems currently exist for automatic removal of metal chips, but despite much interest and research, they are neither very reliable nor generically applicable (I.e.,they can only be used for certain kinds of metals or cutting processes).

A= scitufto_n_in Jaboratories-- first commercial applications.

solution widely and easily available (requiring minimal custom engineering for each application).SOURCE: OTA anawsis and compilation of data from feChnolUgy experta.

76 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

.

Table 14.FMS: Projections for Solution of Key Problems

Current (1984) 1985-86 1987-90- 1991.2000 2001 and beyond

llardWare:1. Generic fixtures for holding a variety of

workinprocess partsBoth hardware and software:2. FMS for:a

a) cylindrical parts productionb) Sheet metal parts production a

c) 3-D mechanical assemblya

0) electronics assembly . el

3. Materials handling systems which canhandle a variety of parts in any sequencenecessary N

Software: .

4. Automatic diagnosis of breakdownsin the FMS........... ................ . 6 a

5: Standardization of softwareinterfaces between computerizeddevices in an FMS_. _

aAlmost all FMS currently running are used _to Machine prismatic parts, (e.g., engine blocks) which are thoSe whose outer shape conaLSts_primarity_tflat surfaces.

The projections in this entry_ refer to FMS for quite different applications: a) machining of cylindrical _parts, such_as_ otors_anddriv_eshafts (or "parts of rotation,"

irt_rnaqhining jargon. since they are generally made on latheS); b) stampingand bandiiig_Ot_Shaatinatai_gart_si_such as car body panels; c) assembly (as opposed to

fabrication of individual parts) of three.diimensionalprodqCMtechiaS_motorstanddyasSembly of electronic devices, such as circuit boards. While machlbail_cuirrerffly

exist tor-automatic Insertion of elettrOnic parts into circuit boards, an electronics FMS would integrate the insertion devices with soldering and testing equipment.

SqletiOn_in labOratorres.first commercial applications. ,

solution widely and easily available (requiring minimal custom engineering for each application).

SOURCE. OTA analysis and compilation of data from technology experts.

Table 15.CIM: Projections for Solution of Key Problems

Current (1984) 1985-86 1987-90 1991;2000 2001-and beyond

Software:1. Well-understood, widely applicable

techniques for s_onedulin_gand logisticsof complex materials handling systems

..

_

that would allow full factory integration i2. Standard communication systems

(networksi ..................... ..... . .

3. Standardization of interfaces betweenwide range of computerized devicesin an integrated factory

4. Data base management systems whichcould_sort maintain and update all datain a factory ....... ............ rr

5. Computerized factories which couldrun on a day-to-day basis with only afew humans in management, designfunctions

A solution in laboratories.0 first _cornrnerciaLapPlications,

solution widely and easily available (requiring minimal custom engineering for each application).

SOURCE: OTA anafysis and compilation of data from technology experts.

Ch. 3Programmable Automation Technologies 97

propriate skills, and social effects of thesetechnologies: These issues are more fully ad-dressed in later chapters of this report.

Many in industry would argue that CIM isinevitably the future of manufacturing. Its ad-vantages in cost, quality, flexibility, and con-trol will, they assert, mandate its adoption.Many parts of computer-integrated manufac-turing can be put together on an ad hoc basisnow, and as the tables show, prototype solu-tions for many of the key problems already ex-ist: However; several key aspects of the puz-zle are as yet unsolved (the development of in-terface standards for computerized tools, inparticular); and for CIM to be practical eachof its elements must be mature, versatile, andrelatively easily available commercially.

As noted earlier in this chapter, CIM doesnot necessarily imply manufacturing withouthumans. In fact, one of the biggest challengeson the road to CIM is learning to use'humansin effective ways, to develop machines withwhich humans can work effectively, and toidentify the points in the production processwhere maintaining human involvement mayenhance flexibility; responsiveness; diagnosticpower, and creativity. The extent to whichthat effective use of people inmanufacturingwill develop, and-the extent to which CIM willremove humans from manufacturing environ-ments, are still open questions.

AutomatiOn technology researchers reportprogress on virtually all of the technical prob-lems, although the degree' of progress oftendepends on research funding, commercial de-mand for related products, and inclinations ofresearchers. The technical barriers to increasedsophistication in programmable automationare largely due to the complexity of the man-ufacturing environment, and to the fact thatmany manufacturing processese.g., machin-ing, scheduling, designhave not been clear-ly understood in a way that can easily becomputerized.

These projections of future techmcal capa-bilities, along with various other projections,imply that the remainder of the 1980's will bea time when applications will to some extent

catch up with developed PA tools. Some tech-nical improvements will doubtless be made -during this time. But most prognosticatorsseem to see the 1990's as a period when theapplication of basic PA tools will become wide-spread, and a number of major technical im-provements will be available, particularly forrobots and FMSs (see tables 12 and 14). Whilethis may, in some cases, suggest that the1990's seem far enough away to solve almostany techMcal problem, it also seems to in

that the next decade will bring quitesubstantial increases in the power and poten-tial uses of programmable automation.

Future Lefels of Use ofProgrammable Automation

The rate of growth in use of programmableautomation in the United States, known as the"diffusion" of the technologies, depends onfactors both in the larger economy and at thelevel of individual firms and products. Someof the more general factors include availabil-ity of capital and skilled labor, internationalcompetition, and the amount of attentionAmerican firms devote to improvements inmanufacturing processes. The last factor maybe the most critical. Manufacturing engineer-ing in the United States has been largely neg-lected both in engineerini schools and inindustry.52

Prompted in partby international competi-tion, however, the mood among American in-dustrialists (to the extent there is a "mood"in such a diverse group) seems to be chang-ing. Increasingly, established managementpractices are being questioned in conferand industry journals, and many industrialmanagers are closely examining improve-ments in manufacturing processes, particular-ly robots.* The extent to which this change

''See, for example, E. N. Berg, "Manufacturing's AcademicRenaissance," The New York Times, Oct. 30, 1983.

*Despite the generally rising interest in robotics, a signifi-cant group of people remainwerfully skeptical about the useof robots as one of the primary steps to enhance productivity.In a 1983 survey by-the Institute of Industrial Engineers; forexample, members of the society who-are- closely involved withmanufacturing processes on a day-to-day basisrated roboticsrelatively low in effectiveness of a group of productivity-

109

98 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

in mood will effect lasting and significantchange in manufacturing, however, is uncer-tain. Many management specialists believethat such lasting change must include discard-ing powerfully entrenched habits in industry,particularlY finaritially-oriented managementstrategies that diStourage risk-taking anddownplay quality relative to cost.53

In addition to these more generalquestions,a large number of factors come into play whenan individual firm chobses to use or not to useprogrammable automation. Some of the tech-nical factorS include: the applicability of thetechnology to the problem at hand; whichtends to vary according to the particular man-

facturing processes used in each factory; thege of tasks to which a given tool can be ap-

enhancing methods. Only 29 percent had undertaken increased use of_ robotics in the past 5_ 22percent rated the stephigh in effectiveness. 48 percent moderate, and 26 percent low.MeaSurea WhiCh received higher effectiveness ratings includ-ed capital investment for new or automated machinery general-ly. worker training. improvement of inventory control, and"systems innovations The interpretation of these surveyresults could differ; som wool e that increased familiarityof industrial engineers wit °baits will lead to higher percep7tions of effectiveness. In addition. robotics was not viewed asunproductive by very many respondents; it simply appearednet to be the productivity tool of first choice. (See "ProductivityToday: An Inside Report." The Institute of IndustrialEngineers. Norcross, Ga.)

'See. for example. R. 11. Hayes and W. J. Abernathy, "Man.aging our way to econonic decline." Harvard Business Revit4,.1 uly.August, 1980. pp. 67-77.

I

plied; the cost of customization, particularlyfor new technologies where few standards ex-ist and almost every application is a proto-type; the ease of use of the tool; the reliabili-ty of the equipment; the compatibility of pro-grammable automation with machines alreadyin place; and finally, the capacity of differentPA systems for upgrading and expansion.

Organizational lactOrS can also have a sig-nificant effect on firmS' automation decisions.For example, one researcher found thatprevious experience With automation was akey factor in successful applications," and in-dustry observeit report that many unsuccess-ful attempts to use programmable automationhave been due to premature jumps into com-plex systems. There can also be substantialresistance to change 4n the part of workers ormanagement. Many manufacturers report.however, that production workers tend toaccept technological changes such as automa-tion, while strong resistance tends to comefrOm middle managers who fear program-mable automation will diminish their degreeof control or eliminate their jobs.65 Chapter 5diatusses organizational issues of PA imple-mentation in more detail.

"J. Fleck, "The Adoption of Robots,- Proceedings of the I 3thInternational SympoSiumbn Industrial Robots and Robots 7.Apr. 17-21, 1983.

ROTA Automation Technology Workshop, May 29. 1983.

Chapter 4

Effects of ProgrammableAutomation on Employment

Contents

Pap,Summary 101

Int roduct ion 102

Effects of Programmable_Automation on Jobs .

E ffects of Programmab Tale Automation on sks. 105

106Effects of Programmable Automation on Skills 110

Effects of Programmable Automation Employment 13y User Industry 112Geographic Incidence 115

Effects of Programmable Automation on Occupational Employment 119Selected Detailed Occupational Groups 119

Shift in ',kills and Occupational Mix 14.1Shift Toward White Collar/Salaried Employment 14;1Transient Skill Requirements 151Compensation Patterns 153

t'ontextual Factors 162I ,abor Supply 161.1;ipitnest, Morhanp-uns (d Adjust ',writ 169

'fables111d, 4.,

ft:sic Activity Elements With NC Nlachins and Elexiblc,"hinot,t-turim, .5,vstene; 197

()I NI anufnct urine; 1 n(Ite4t ries 1 1:1

1.s. Unemployment Rates by State, 1976-82 . 117

19. Number and Distribution of Engineers. 1980 .120

20. Employment of Computer Systems Analysts. 1980 .12.1.

21. Percent. DistributiOn of Engineering Employmentby Industry Group: 1970 and 1978 122

22. Combined Employment of Engineering 'Technicians. NIC Tool Programers.imd_Computer ProgrametS, 1980 125

2:1. Craftworker Eriiploytnent and Selected Occupations, 1980 ........ 129

21. Operative and Laborer Employment and Seleeted Occupations, 1980 131

25. Trade-Sensitive Rmployment 133

26. Employment of Mechanics and Related Personnel; 1980 134

27. Employment of Flamecutters; Welders; and Production Paintersin the MeUtlworking Industries; 1980 135

28. Machinist Ernployment;_1980 137

29. Employment of ASSeitiVerS in Selected Manufacturing Industries. 1980 138

:30. Employment of Inspectors; 1980 140

31. Clerical Employment; 1980_ 141

32: Employment of Managerial -and Supervisory Personnel; 1980 143

:3:1. 1980 Employment for All Manufacturing Industries.Selected PA-Sensitive Occupations_ 145

34. Catnegie-Mellon _University Study EStitnates 147

33: Estimates of RObbt_Mantifatturer_Staffing Profiles; 1982 149

:36. Industry Staffing Pattern Contrasts 150

:17. Earnings by Industry 156

38: Earnings -of Prodded-6h wotkees, Selected Industry Groups;1936 to Date, Annual Averages _

157

:39. Average Hourly Earnings in the Machinery Manufacturing Industry;in Selected Areas by OCcupatkiii, 1974-75, 1978; 1981 : : . 159

40. Distribution Of Total U.S. Labor Force Among Earnings_ Classes, 1960and 1975, and Distribution of 1960775 Rib Increases in the Services 161

11. U:S: Population by Age GrOiipS, 1929783 165

42. U.S. Population and Labor Force; 1929-83 166

43. Japanese Population and Forecast 168

44. Minority Employment_Patterns 170

45: Relative Educational Attainment 171

46. Employed Persons and Employees by Occupation, Japan 172

.17. Employed Persons by Industry and Status in Employment; Japan 175

Figures

Figure No.Page

i 4. ConceptUal Model Occupational Demand Change 106

15. Regional Manufacturing Employment 116

16: Sectoral Earnings Pattethq 155

17. Technology Change and Real Wages 163

Chapter 4

Effects of ProgrammableAutomation on Employment

SummaryEmployment change due to programmable

automation (PA) will not be precipitous. Pro-grammable automation will depress the num-ber of jobs available in manufacturing, but itwill not necessarily cause significant nationalunemployment during this decade or even thenext. By eliminating specific tasks and by con-tributing to major changes in manufacturingprocesses and organizations, PA will "dis-place" jobs (where jobs are defined as sets oftasks performed by individuals working astandard number of hours). Whether unem-ployment occurs depends not only on thesedisplacement effects, but also on the level ofproduction volume (which depends on foreigntrade and consumer demand), and on the num-bers and types of people seeking work.

Slower growth in the labor force, increasesin capital goods production, andlimited or im-perfect use of PA technology are among thefactors likely to buoy manufacturing employ-ment during this century. However, regionaland local employment may suffer due to thecombined effects of labor-saving technology,import competition, and other factors, espe-cially where area economies depend on so-called declining or mature industries. Yet PAmay help firms in those industries employmore people than they might otherwiseatleast to the extent that it makes them morecompetitive. Cumulative experience and im-provements in technical capabilities and costsshould increase the use of PA (and its employ-ment effects) during the 1990's relative to the1980's.

Programmable automation will reinforce theongoing trend toward increased "white collar"or salaried employment and increased serviceindustry employment, although skill require-

ments for jobs at all but the highest levels inmanufacturing may fall. Producers of PA areparticularly likely to employ predominantlysalaried personnel, especially if they continueto import significant amounts of PA hardwarefrom overseas. Consequently, there will be fewopportunities for people to move directly fromproduction jobs where PA is used to jobs pro-ducing PA. Also, the limited amount of actualproduction work expected among PA Indus-tries is one reason OTA expects that job crea-tion among producers of PA equipment andsystems will be less than job loss among users.

Programmable automation will blur distinc-tions between occupational categories and pre-sent vast opportunities for restructuring jobs.Among occupational groups, technicians willbecome more prominent with the spread ofPA, in part because they will perform tasksotherwise performed by engineers or skilledtradesmen. Engineers will nevertheless con-stitute a growing share of manufacturing em-ployment, as may mechanics, repairers, andinstallers. Operatives, laborers, and produc-tion-clerical personnel are the most vulnerableto displacement.

PA will provide ndw opportunities for struc-turing jobs because of itatendency to displaceand to create individual tasks. It thereforeraises questions about the tradeoff betweenlarge numbers of narrowly defined jobscus-tomary in manufacturing to dateand smallernumbers of more broadly defined jobs. Howand whether the potential for positive changein job design and the organization of work isrealized depends on decisions by individualmanagers. Many factors--e.&, the operatingspeed of automated equipment, the breadth offunctions it can perform, and the reduction in

10"

102 Computerized Mari ulacturing Automation: Employment, Education; and the Workplace

average skill requireinents some users may ex,periencemay cause a Problem of overconfi-dence in programmable automation. There isa risk that users may oo readily assume that

the computer knows best, overlooking the val-ue of experience-based understanding of man-ufacturing processes.

IntroductionThe elimination of jobs will be a principal

long-term effect of programmable automation:PA technologies are deSigiied to reduce laborhours in production. They are sold as laborsubstitutes; whether or not the total numberof employees *ill actually fall with their use.Even the advertising language emphasizes thecapacity of machines to emulate or improveon human performance (e.g., "the graphicslathe control that thinks like a machinist"); Inaddition to its impacts on the number of jobs;programmable automation will also bringabout major changes in job content and jobmix in the manufacturing workplace; All ofthese effects will occur not because of techno-logical change alone; but because of concomi-tant changes in how companies are organizedand managed and in what and how much theyproduce.

This report does not examine employmentchange exhaustively.* Doing so would requirea thoroughgoing examination of changes inthe structure of the economy and individualindustries. The report does; however; showhow One set of technologies (which can be usedacross an unusually broad range of iiidtiatries)may alter demand for labor; It ShOWS that pro-grammable automation creates enormous poten,tial for change in the use of labor. Not only willit reduce the amount °Haber used to producea given amount of pro-chid, it will alad moti-vate shifts in the mix of peratihriel and in theservices sought from -employees. PA will di-rectly or indirectly affect all types of person-nel; professional and technical as well as pro-duction_ and clerical.

*For additional treatment of employment change see upcorning OTA assessments on technology and structural unemploy-ment; technology, innovation, and regional economic de'Velop-ment; and economic transition.

Despite this broad potential for Change, noone set of impacts is inexorable. PA and otherfactors (e.g.; changes in consumer demand andin the business relationshipS between firms)will present employers with choices about thenumber and types of personnel they use. Theoutcomes of those choices will determine fu-ture staffing patterns and employment levelsin firms and industries.

Prior to examining the employment effectsof programmable automation, it is useful toreview some basic labor market characteristicsand analytical concepts. In the aggregate,changes in industry or national einploymentlevels depend principally on economic condi-tions; including both short=tertri cyclical con7ditions and more profound structural changesin the economy. These conditions reflectchanging buying patterns of consumers aswell as the investment decisions of companiesand Federal budget policy (which affects thefinancial resources of individuals and buSi,nesses). The riumbeis and types of jobs dependheaVily on the numbers and types of goods andservices consumers demand and on the &Ain=tries from which they buy them; ForthiS red-son, import (and export) levelswhiCh reflectpreferences for foreign products relatiVe to do=mestic onesare an important deterniiriant ofemployment;

Technology used in production is a second,ary influence that is dwarfed by the effects ofdemand changes; it governs the mix of laborand other inputs; Technology change generallyaffects employment much more SloWly thando demand shifts; because it dee§ not affectan industry or an economy all_at once. Auto-mation, in particular; is tyPiCally adopted dux.;ing periods of economic expaiiSibh, a timing

Ch. 4Effects of Programmable Automation on Employment 103

that facilitates the adjustment of work forcesthrough attrition.*

While it is hard to attribute past employ-ment growth to a single technology change,the introduction of new products and produc-tion processes has historically been associatedwith employment growth. This has occurreddespite the fact that productivity improve-ment (due to technology or other factors) byitselfi.e., unaccompanied by change in pro-duction volume or in the 'average number ofworking hours per jobWill result in fewerjobs.**

The fact that interest in automation has&own during two closely spaced recessionstends to confuse the perceived relationshipsbetween automation and employment. Manyemployers laid off personnel because of therecessions, as is usual; what is unusual is that

*These points are frequently raised by the Bureau of LaborStatistics. Also, West German research shows that on an overallindustry level, the dining of adoption of automation, relativeto when it is first introduced; affects the rate and level ofemployment change:A West German study found that the ac-tual and hypothetical employment reductions associated withnumerically controlled (NC) machine tools fell between 1973 and1979: actual layoffs were negligible. The authors concluded thatthe potential for displacement depended on where the technol-ogy was used: compared to the early ones, later NC investmentswere aimed at replacing old equipment rather than expandingcapacity, and such installations were more common among rel-atively small users, where the opportUnity for productivity im-proveriient (and displacement) was lower:

As that study illustrates, estimates of potential displacementshould allow for change in baseline conditions over time. An-other German study estimated that when used as an alternativeto standalone NC. newer flexible manufacturing system (FMS)technology could displace 1;000 to 3,000 people-by 1990, or lessthan 1 percent of metalworking employment. The authors con-cluded that organizational inertia iLnd difficulties involved inusing_the relatively new technology would retard actual dis-placement. The conclusions drawn in these studies are consist-ent with the expectations of analysts who are familiar withAmerican use of NC and FMS. See Werner Dostal, et al.,-- "Flex-ible Manufacturing Systems and Job Structures" (Mitteilungenaus der Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung)r 1982; and WernerDostal and Klaus Kostner, "Changes in Employment With theUse of Numerically Controlled Machine Tools" (Mitteilungenaus der Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung), 1982.

**OECD, for example, has estimated that if productivity wereto rise 10 percent between 1980 and 1990 and world trade failedto grow over the decade, aggregate employment would be 0 to4 percent lower than in 1980. However, OECD believes thatthe higher estimate is unrealistic, because such productivitygrowth would be unusually high, permanent increases in pro-ductivity growth rates are unlikely, and static trade is especiallyunlikely. Microelectronics, Robotics and Jobs, OECD, Paris,1982, p. 90.

25-452 0 - 84 - 8 : QL 3

some may not rehire to pre-recession levels be-cause of recent or planned automation, andiorbecause of permanent declines in their busi-ness. Thus, the percentage of unemploymentdue to permanent separations (as opposed tolayoffs and other factors) grew during the lastrecession. These developments will likely slowthe return of the unemployment rate to pre-re-cession levels.' On the other hand; because ofthe recessions and recent high interest ratesmany firms avoided investing in new equip-ment. The recovery may outpace their abilityto automate, or it may fail to generate suffi-cient profits for them to automate.

The auto industry exemplifies all of thesepossibilities to some degree. Yet it was wide-ly recognized before the recent explosion of in-terest in robots that U.S. automobile manufac-turers were unlikely to hire to prior peak levelsanyway; at least during the 1980's; becauseof changes in the auto market; such as growthin imports.2 In some industries; such as autos;PA may help to preserve jobs by helpingdomestic firms repel import competition, al-though total industry employment may fall.*

Changes in employment levels will dependnot only on how technology and economic con-ditions affect industries immediately involvedin producing and using the technology; theywill also depend on how related industries (e.g.,suppliers and customers) are affected. Evalua-dim of both direct and indirect employmenteffects generally requires a macroeconoinicmodel that captures interindustry links andtheir sensitivity to changes in prices and tech-

'Robert W. Bednarzik, "Layoffs and Permanent Jobs Losses:Workers' Traits and Cyclical Patterns," Monthly Labor Review,September 1983.

'See Increased Automobile Fuel Efficiency and SyntheticFuels.._ Alternatives for Reducing Oil Imports (Washington,D.C.: U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, OTA:E-185, September 1982),

*For reference, note that Arthur D. Little concluded from astudy of West European auto manufacturing that despite ananticipated $40 billion investment in programmable- automa-tion during the 1980's, the West European share of the worldauto market will continue to fall, and its employment capacitymay fall by as much as 30 percent from current levels. See.Martyn Chase, "European Car Makers Seen InstMling $40 Bil-hon in Automation Equipment," American Metal Market/Metalworking News, Feb. 28, 1983.

°,11 11 -L1

104 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education; and the Workplace

nologies; At this time, available data are not and recent growth in imports may burden in-

adequate to fully model the likely impacts of dividuals and communities at least temporari-PA ly; especially if PA use grows more quickly

and extensively than appears likely duringA major advance in this directidri comes

fromthis decade- Changes in industry demand for

om a study recently conducted at NeW York specific skills will make it harder for some in-University. It concluded from an input:Output dividuals to find or change jobs, as will region-analysis that, given the likely impacts of Sey- al dependence on specific industries. Thus; PAeral computer-based technologieS on labor may aggravate ongoing local unemployment;requirements in manufacturing, edUCation, While the Nation as a whole will benefit fromhealth, and the office workplace, and given the the produttivity gains expected_from PA, itemployment generated by increased prOduC= will not benefit fully if otherwise productivelion of computerized equipment, significant labor resources are idled for long periods ofunemployment during this century is not like= tithe.ly to result from progressive computerization(provided that the work force can satisfy shift- Analysis of the employment impacts of pro-ing occupational and sectoral requirements). grammable automation is fraught with diffi-

That study illustrates how employment inculty; Briefly; analysts generally approach theproblem from two perspectives: the engineer-

Manufacturing can be stimulated thrOugh this icentury by the production requirements of po-

ing approach, which focuses on the potentialfor equipment to substitute for people on a

tential rates of installation of computers and task-by-task basis; and the economic ap-

environments; The study underscores the iautomation

into the manilla-dining and Office proach, which derives employment estimateszn-

ej

from models of the interaction among indus-portant role that domestic production Of cap- tries based on their requirements for labor andital goodsdemand by businesses ft the other production inputs. Both approachesproducts of other businesses=playS in main- have shorthomings. Moreover; the number oftwining domestic employment levels. It also different PA technologies; the range of equip-shows that slower growth in the labor force ment designs and implementation strategies,,can blunt the employment effects of labor-say- and uncertainties about the speed and successing technologies. As the authors note, addi-tional work is needed to assess the effects of __general rules about job loss (or creation) risky.other factbra on emplOyment, such -as possi-______sooxxy_does'existing variation among employ-ble changes in production materials; in level era (even in the same industry) in job mix, jOband manner of equipment integration, and in definition; and adaptability to change. Final-trade patterns.3 ly, data describing_ prevailing skill require-

OTA shares the view that use of programma- ments; jobs; and job mixes among firms areble automation can grow, as is expected, with- limited. As the technical memorandum pub-out large increases in national unemployment fished during the course of this assessment ex-during this ec.ititry. The effects on employment plained, predictions of employment impactsof labor=Saying teehnologies can be offSet in should be regarded with caution. Availablethe aggregate by changes in the labor force; data only permit insights into the likely direc-as well as by likely increases in output for cap- tions for employment change.Rai goods and other products; Such output This chapter examines hoW PA is likely togrowth, Of course, assumes a strong economy. affect employment opportunities, drawing onHowever, the transition in industry structure inferences from case studies, site visits, inter-and occupational profiles accompanying PA views; and technical literature. It focuses on

change at the level of the firm and the indus-Waiiily Leontief and Fay Diichin; The Impacts of Auto-

mation on Employment, 1963.2000, final report, New_ YorkUniveisity, Institute for Economic Analysis, April 1984.

t

116

Ch. 4Effects of Programmable Automation on Employment 105

try. The first section describeshow, and why,programmable automation will_shape job cp.portunitiesAt traces potential effect§ on OASand skills. The second section describes whereemployment impacts are likely to be experi-enced, by industry and by geographic region.The third section exploreS the implications ofprogrammable automation for specific occupa-tional groups. Together, the first three sec-

. Mons identify the groupS of people most like-ly to experience employment change and thetypes of change they may confront.

The final sections address the implicationsof those changes for the labor market overall.The fourth section discusses the overall effectof likely impacts on tasks, skills, and occupa-tions. It draws on other studies of individualautomation technologies and industries to pro-vide perspective. The fifth section discussescontextual factors that will shape observedemployment patterns. It identifies trends inthe supply of labor, and it describesrecentJapanese experiences in adjusting to auto-mation.

EffeaS Of Programmable Automation on JobsAs figure 14 illustrates, change in employ-

ment induced by new technology depends onhow technology alters the tasks to be done inmanufacturing jobs, on what changes o-cctr inthe Skills required for different tasks and jobs,and on how the roles of different occupationschange; total employment change also de-pends on changes in how labor is used withinand between industries and changes in laborsupply. The effects of PA on work opportuni-ties are so varied and (at times) so profoundthat they call into question the basic defini-tion of "skill," the identification of where skillfits into the production process; and the rela-tionships between tasks; skills; occupations,and jobs. Changes in task assignments andskill requirements vitiate traditional occupa-tional descriptions; which form the basis of oc-cupational employment forecasting.*

Employers create jobs by combining sets oftasks and allocating them to individuals. Jobswith similar descriptions and avenues of prep-aration are classified as occupations. Indeed;the design of training programs depends onthe expectation that people in designated oc-cupations or jobs will perform specific tasks.Unfortunately for the analyst; what is actually

The changes may occur only informally, at least at first, andmay not be reflected in job titles.

I t-11.-

done on the job frequently differs from the for-mal job description. Differences in actual func-tion between various jobs and occupations areoften nominal; while companies differ in whatthey ask of people in the same occupations,even within a given industry.

Computer-basSd tchnologies, including nu-merical control (NC) technology, have alreadyled to different staffing patterns within andamong countries, varying on the basis of in-dustrial traditions, labor market conditions;prevailing types of company structure, and na.tional educational systems. These variationsfurther complicate employment forecasting, asemployment change depends on a series of de-cisions yet to be made by current and poten-tial employees; employers, and educators.

A German analysis of flexible Manufactur-ing systems (FMS), for example, concludedthat work within an FMS was cOmprised ofa set of tasks that could be allocated in numer-ous ways generally not bound by the technol-ogy (see table 16). The authors illustrated thispoint by contrasting two cases; one with threetypes of jobs directly associated with theFMS, the other with five. They concluded that,while the tecimology permits unusual freedomin defining jobs, and is particularly conduciveto multifaceted jobs, radical change in job de-

117

106 Compbterized Manufacturing Automation: Empfoyment, Education, and the Workplace ..

Figure 14.Conceptual Model: Occupational Demand Change

r force tit

Censuspopulationprojections

Age/sex/raceparticipation

rates

Otherassumptions

GNPisaggregation

bordemand

Industryproductivity

Industry Industryhours ;,,,t;,tv employment

MVS1

fpZ. 1 p4obc impt!?

'1!5z .N4CIC*1

Occupationalnt y1

Staffingpatterns

'41

sit vr4te.mor7774?-.0,,

aEmblOyMent_tetels will depend on Industry and labor supply_lactors. as wellas levels of economic activity, as notedin larger model above

SOURCE: Office Of Technotagy Assesament, with Input Item Robert Elednarzikof the U.S. Labor; Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Management choicesre: Job definition

IOccupational domanda(staffing pattern)

scriptions is a distant prospect due to the -slow-ness of organizational change.6 OTA sharesthis perceptioin.

Effects of Programmable Automationon Tasks

AlthOtigh each application of programmableautomation in the workplace is unique, OTA'sanalysis reveals some common trends in howautomation affects the use of labor. At thesimplest level, automation displaces and/orcreates tasks: Where tasks are transferredfrom people to machines, fewer jobs are asso-ciated with the production of a given amountof product. This transfer process constitutesdisplacementthe elimination of tasks (andultimately of jobs) that would have been avail-able but for automation. On the other hand,the introduction of new equipment and sys;tems into the workplace also creates tasks,particularly in the de-sign of products and themaintenance of the eqUipment. The situationbeCOMes more complex where production66§e§ change more significantly. In this case,even tasks and personnel associated remote-ly, or not at all, with the primary tasks per-formed by the equipthent will be affected.

'Werner Dostal, eta:, ''Flexible Manufacturing Systems andJOb Structures" (Mitteilungen aus der Arbeitsmarkt- andBerufsforschungi, 1982.

Ch. 4-Effects of Programmable Automation on Employment 107

Table 16.-Basic Tasks: Activity Elements With NCMachines and Flexible Manufacturing Systems

Programing and planning:1. preparation of a program

'2: "modification of a program3. preparation of tool blueprint4. preparation of mounting blueprint5. processing problems: interviews for additional

information6. the activities of a programer or operator in case of

breakdownsPreparation and equipment:

1. making the tools available and transportation oftools and mounting means

2. presetting of tools and mounting means3. control of tool installation; bringing of tools into

play4. preparation and setting up of mounting means and

devices5. lifting and putting down of a workpiece6. mounting of workpieces according to the mounting

blueprint and one's experience7. control of mounted workpieces8. switching on and adjustment of refrigerant efflux

Preparing and equipping:1. input output media insertion, spooling removal2. zero adjustment3. placing the correction switch aCtacling to tool and

mounting blueprint4. placing correction switch towards tool lock5. test run with coordinate and cutting direction

controlOperation and supervision of machines:

1. starting of a program run2. obserying of the operating cycle3. re_moval_of shavings4. changing of tools and mounting5. supervision of the operating status of the

installation6. discovery of false control movements7. activating of the switch in case of breakdowns8. removal of breakdowns

Controlling and monitoring:1. measure and- surface- control during processing2. control of the complete workpieces3. installation care4. putting into operation and keeping in operation5. training of an operator

SOURCE: W. DoStal, et al., "Flexible Manufacturing Systems and Job Structures"(Mitteilungen aus der Arbelfsmarkf- and Serufsforschung), 1982.

Task DisplacementAutomated equipment and systems perform

specific, primary tasks previously or otherwisedone by people, such as welding, materialshandling, and revision of:Product designs. Thefewer the tasks in the original job definition,the more likely that automation of a given taskwill lead to job displacement. For example, ifa person does only spot welding, the introduc-tion of a spot-welding robot is more, likely toresult in the elimination of part or all of that

kill.

Photo credit: Cincinnati Milacron,Linc.

Machine cell 'with two computerized numericallycontrolled turning centers and robot for machine

loading/unloading and inspection

job than if the person did spot welding andother tasks; such as welding-gun repair:

Programmable equipment and systens cansubstitute for labor more readily than can con-ventional equipment, in part because of their ver-satility; a single system can perform multipletasks. In particular; they perform secondark,tasks in the factory, such as collecting andtransferring information on equipment use ormovement of parts; and even automating the.:flow of materials. Consequently; program-mable automation may assume tasks tradi-tionally done by nonproduction labor,, from'managers to stock-chaoers; as well as thOsedone_by production workers: Also,- substitu-tion for labor may occur when PAis used to,replace other types of equipment. For exam-ple, robots have been adopted by automobilemanufacturers as an alternative to .automaticwelding machines (run by people) to dO spcitwelding in automotive assembly.

The possibilities for displacing labor aregenerally greater_ for compute-integratedmanufacturing (CIM)_systems than for standalone applications of automation althoughsuch systems do not 'eliminate all need' forhuman input. For example, a single arc-weld-

108 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

ing robot may require an operator (althoughthat robot/person combination may make thehiring of additional welders unnecessary if itis more productive than a single human -weld-er). On the other hand, a single materials-giandling robot serving other pieces of equip-ment may displace a humanmaterials-handlerwithout requiring an operator, although atleast one person may oversee the larger assem-blage of equipment. Similarly, flexible manu-facturing systems have the potential to dis-place more people for a given set of machin-ing tasks than do stand-alone NC machirotools. However, because the art of designingand implementing successful integrated man-ufacturing systems remains immature, andbecause FMS implementation is (and is ex-pected to remain) Ihnited, significant labordisplacement by either CIM or FMS is unlike-ly in the near term.*

Programmable automation floes not alwayssubstitute for labor in an obvious or directway. For example, early research intobin-pick-ing robot applications showed that it was moreefficient to do away with humandike sequencesof steps than to imitate them.elriSonie cases,automation accompanies or motivates majorchanges in production processes which them-

*James Bright drew the same conclusion about the displace-ment potential of systems by evWuating conventional automa-tion and the use of computers in the late 1950's and early 1960's.In a paper prepared for the U.S. National Commission on Tech-nology; Automation, and Economic Progress in 1966, Brightnoted that the degree of mechanization varied among applicadons along thre;e diinension: I) "span," or use across a sequenceof operations: 2) "level," the degree of automatic process con-trol; and 3) "penetration," the extent to which such secondaryand tertiary tasks as setup and repair are automated. Brightconcluded that "successive advances in automatic capabilitygenerally reduce operator duties and hence contributions" (p.II-210). He observed that sophisticated systems can and will

--- automate eonce_ptual as well as _physical work. In contrast,simpler_ systems tend more to function as tools, complement-ing the human user: Set James R. Bright, "The Relationshipof IncreaSing Automation and Skill_Requirements," The Emplrment Impact of Tkhnolegical Change, app. vol. 11 to thereport of the U.S. National Commission on Technology, Auto-mation; and Economic Progress (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Gov-ernment Printing Office; February 19661.

"Steven Ashley, "GE to Install Forging Bin Picker Robot,"American Metal Market/Metalworking News, :lime 6, 1983.

selves alter the use of labor. As a sequence ofproduction operations, a process determinesthe types and arnount_of tasks humans ormachines can perform. For example, comput-er-aided design (CAD) (in its higher forms)allows many product designs and productionplans to be tested through simulations ratherthan through the building and manipulationof prototypes, Ac'cordingly, an aircraft man-ufacturer developed a CAD package for ration-alizing piping design, replacing its prior prac-tice of building full-scale mockups of pipe lay-outs against which production piping was thenmatched.' These two practices, prototype andsimulation, have vastly different implicationsfor staffing: in simple terms, prototype con-struction involved production labor, especiallyskilled workers, while simulation and comput-er analysis involve engineers and technicians.

Other cases of process change are even moredramatic. For example, when IBM installeda robot to test pin placement for componentwiring, the robotic application essentially elim-inated the practice of delayed testing of com-pleted assemblies by people using diagnosticsoftware packages. (This robotic applicationmay in turn be replaced by a process for chem-ically bonding wires to boards, eliminating theneed for pins.) As these exampled suggest,even stand-alone applications of program-mable automation can give rise_ to radical man-ufacturing process changes. The more exten-sive the process change, the more obscure thedirect implications for jobs even though thepotential impact may be substantially greater.

Process change, with or without automa-tion, often is accomj,anied or occasioned by achange in product design.* This cothbination

IOTA case study.*For example, continuing reductions in computer size reduce

the number of parts used in computers, resulting in fewer fab-rication and assembly tasks. Also, companies seeking to designproducts for ease of production are increasingly designing prod-ucts that can be assembled like "layer takes," built from thebottom up in layers with nc need for upending during assem-bly. Such design changes reduce production labor with orwithoGt automation.

Ch. 4Effects of Programmable Automation on Employment 109

of events generally complicates the analysisof displacement. Most employment forecastsassume constant product characteristics,which imply constant (average) requirementsfor labor, capital, and materials. The morevariables that change, the harder it is to modelproduction and forecast related employment.Furthermore, conventional employment fore-casting techniques are ill-suited to evaluatesimultaneous changes in product and processcharacteristics because these potentially in-volve changes in industry characteristics, suchas production scale, number of firms, and num-ber and nature of suppliers.

Task CreationAlthough process change may vary in de-

gree, it is the principal reason that program-mable automation can also be said to createjobs. Tasks (and thus jobs) are created throughtechnology change in several ways first, theuse of programmable automation may entailmore intensive work in some areas. For exam-ple, automated systems tend to require moremaintenance work than conventional andstand-alone equipment, in part because thecost of a breakdown is much higher. Similarly, CAD and CAE (computer-aided engineer-ing applications of CAD) may stimulate designand engineering activity. As those technolo-gies have made- esign and product engineer-ing easier and cheaper; employers have hiredmore engineers.

Second, the introduction of software and in-tegrated databases associated with program-mable automation creates a need for new typesof support work; such as database manage-ment; software maintenance; and programing;Taking the long view, however; some supporttasks may only be needed temporarily: The in-tegration of different types of equipmenteliminates some of the programing work as-sociated with separate units. This phenome-non is discussed further in a later section_ ofthis chapter (see "Transient Skill Re-quirements").

Third, if buyers want a given product, pro-grammable automation may help producerssell enough-to maintain or even increase em-

4". ployment For example, several small metal-working firms studied by OTA increases) theirbusiness (and employment) by using NC ma-chinery, which, helped them to deliver morequickly and develop better bids.8 Change inemployment levels depends most heavily onthe level of demand for different products,which depends in turn on consumer prefer-ences and budgets.

Fourth, the production, distribution, andservicing of programmable automation willalso generate tasks and jobi. Since automatedequipment sometimes replaces conventionalequipment, the net increase in work dependson how much employment falts among pro-ducers of conventional equipment. For exam-ple, companies may buy robots as an alter-native to nonprogrammable materials-han-dling equipment. The employment potential.within the PA-producing industries is dis-cussed in a later section.

Other Task EffectsProgrammable automation is also used for

tasks people are not Well-suited for or likelyto do, because the tasks would be too difficult,risky, and/or time-consuming, and consequent-ly too expensive.* One example is the designof integrated circuits, for which computer as-sistance is considered necessary (although con-ceivably teams of people at drawing boardscould eventually do what individuals at ter-minals do much more quickly). Similarly, forcertain types of complex machining (e.g., forships' propellers), NC is considered necessary

"OTA case study.The applicagon of PA to hazardous and unpleasant tasks

is discussed inh. 5, "Work Environment." One example,though, is Chrysler's decision to use a robot to paint the in-side of a minivan. According to the vice president for manufac-turing, "It replaces only one guy, so costwise, it will never payoff. But painting the inside of a van is the most miserable jobin the plant." See John Holusha "Chrysler: New Van andPlant," The New York Times, Oct. 28, 1983.

121

110 Computerized Manufacturing Autemation: Employment; Education; and the Workplace,

or preferable. In both cases, the equipment isnot totally automatic; human input is re-quired. At this time, programmable automa-tion appears essential for only a relatively few.tasks. That set may be enlarged as manufac-turers refine and take advantage of PA's capa-bilities and as totally new products are in-vented. The inability to forecast such newproductS again interferes with employmentforecasting.

Effects of Programmable Automationon Skills

Programmable automation; through_its et=fects on the tasks performed in manufactur;ing firms, also affects the types of job skillsrequired for those tasks. In some cases, thecreation of new tasks and the elimination ofold ones clearly raises or lowers skill re-qiiirements. Often; hoWeVet, the effect on skilldemand is ambiguous * because the skills asso-ciated with indiVidual jobs_ and the averageskill level of a company's -jobs depend on howwork is alloCated among individuals. Skill de-mand also depends on how well employers un-derstand what aldlls they really need. By alter-ing the baltinee of work between people andmachines, PA makes it possible for managersto reallocaee work in ways that either raise orlower the skill requirements of jobs.

OTA's appraisal of the effects of PA on theworkplace suggests that these technologieswill alter both the "depth" and "breadth" ofskill requireMenta._Skill depth refers to the in-_

put needed to Perfotth an individual task orgroup of interconnected_ tasks, While skillbreadthrefetS to the input needed to performa set of (nonsittilar) tasks. For example; ajourneyman machinist (who sets up amachinist openates machine tools, applying a knowledge ofmechanics, mathematics, metallurgy; layout,

122I I.k 'Mk d

skilland machining9) has skill depth in the area ofmachining. Traditionally, subjective notionsabout which people do Skilled worke.g., crafts-men, professionals, specialistsdraw on theconcept of skill depth. Skill breadth has tradi-tionally been viewed with more ambivalencee.g., 'lack of all trades and master of none."This is one reason why labor contracts inunionized firms, for example, contain job clas-sificationa that define relatively narrowly therequirements and tasks of specific jobs. It isthese qualities' that govern people's percep-tions about whether skill requirements haverisen or fallen.

Skill DepthSkill depth has two dimensions:_time to pro-

ficiency, and judgment. Jobs comprised oftasks that require little or no time to master(e.g., food service or filing) and limited judg-ment tend to be low-skilled jobs in which_ac-ceSS is broad and pay is relatively low. Thelongor the time to proficiency, the more likcLly that formal training is required for hiringanti promotion._ For example, conventionalchaffing requires at least 2 years of technicaltraining, while electrical engineering requiresat least 4 years of formal training. Althoughsalaried (so-called "white collar") and hourly("blue collar") work traditionally offer dif-ferent, usually quite separate, career paths,both types of work include hierarchies of jobsthat differ in terms of time to proficiency andjudgment, as well as other traits.

.

Programmable automation seems to lowerthe time to proficiency and judgment requiredfor many tasks; including those performed byprofessionals as well as craftworkers. Thus, it

'U.S. Department of Labar, Employment and_Training Ad-ministration, Dictionary of Occupotiontil Mies, 4thed. (Wash-ington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office; 1977).

Ch. 4Effects of Programmable Automation on Employment 111

tends to reduce the need for skill depth in re-lated jobs. Through computerization (and ac-companying aspects of mechanical design),automated equipment offers the ability to per-form a variety of relatively easy-to-learn tasks(e.g., drawing basic shapes) and increasing .numbers of more sophisticated tasks (e.g.,process planning). With PA relevant informa-tion is; in effect; shared between operators andequipment; People workintswith automatedsystems therefore have fewer' decisions tomake, while those who control the design ofa system have more;

Thus, reduction in skill depth is largely duev.to a shift in emphasis away from complexmanual work and toward simpler mental work,but it may involve decreases in both manualand mental tasks. For example, a study com-paring early NC machine tools to conventionalequipment noted that physical effort was di-minished (in an amount depending on the ex-tent of "automation"); demand for motor skills"and the associated perceptual load related toprecision and accuracy of movement" were re-duced. and the number of operator decisionsfell.*

Computerization may affect skill require-ments by. allowing greater freedom in the al-location of tasks; For example; NC technologyallows programing to be separated from ma-

. chine operation; CNC (computerized numericalcontrol); however, facilitates the combinationof programing and operation into a single job;If NC programing is performed by a separateprogramer, less judgment and proficiency isrequir0:1 for machine operation. As another ex-ample. CAD systems are being developed thatprevent certain actions, including mistakes.**

*'While "conceptual skill associated with the interpretation, of symbolic information in the form of drawings. planning in-

structions and calculations- rose; in _more modern NC- applica-tions these tasks are often done by the programer rather thanthe operator. R. J. Hazlehurst, et al. "A Comparison of the Skillsof Machinists on Numerically-Controlled and ConventionalMachines," Occupational Psychology, vol. 43. Nos. 38t4. 1969:

**At least one commercially avlable system (Computervi-sion's CA DDS 4) prevents design detailers from permanentlychanging designs.

On the other hand; CAD itself may allow el-17gingers to complete designs without the aidof draftsmen.

Since there is less to learn to operate CADor NC equipment; people with initially lowerskills can produce better; faster than theycould with conventional technology; Recogniz-ing this; many companies have separated ma-chine operation from NE programing in orderto hire less,skilled machine operators insteadof high-skilled machinists. However, this isless likely to occur where the product is ex-tremely complex and/or the work less easilyshared. OTA's studies of machine shops atboth small and large firms show that employ7ers prefer skilled machinists to operate NCmachines for complex tasks. It is not clear thatfurther refinement of NC technology will elim:inate this need, although it may reduce it. Con-sequently, it is dangerous to generalize aboutthe impact of PA on skill requirements andstaffing.

The removal of skill and the fragmentation-of work have always occurred with mechaniza-tion. What makes programmable automationdifferent from dedicated, or "hard," automa-tion is the ability to reduce the skill requiredfor specific tasks at higher levels in the organi-zation (see discussions of aircraft companycase study in ch. 5).

Skill BreadthThe potential effects of PA on skill breadth,

which applies more to jobs or occupations thanto single tasks, are less evident than the ef-fects on skill depth. Requirements for the vari-ety of skills in a job are determined by employ-ers, who define specific jobs and hierarchies.PA and other technologies do not force specificforms of work organization; they provide em-ployers with sets of choices about job designand division of labor;

OTA's case studies and other sources sug-gest that, in some cases, personnel workingwith PA may require less intimate knowledgeof a single process or task but also a general

123

2 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education; and the Workplace

nowledge of more tasks. Among the cases ex-mined by OTA, Skill breadth was most re-uired rOr repair and maintenance personnel.'hese personnel have been confronted withlore varied types of equipment on the job,nd with equipment that combines electrical,lectronic, and mechanical features. Also pro-rammable automation calls more attention3 production processes, to the linkage (withnd without computer-based integration) of ac-ivities into systems and of system to system.:onsequently, some experts argue that pro;3ssional, technical, and managerial staff,' inarticular, require broader familiarity withproduction activities and their interconnec-ions (as well as an understanding of the:leans and limitations of computer control).

Skill breadth may be associated with chang:ag job content. A Japanese survey of elec-

trical machinery workers reported that mostof these workers found that-microelectronicswas associated with frequent change in thecontent of their work.'° Elsewhere, Japaneseresearchers concluded from a series of automa-tion case studies that changes in jobs and jobcontent erode the value of experience; one re-ported solution was to promote experiencedworkers to various tasks involving watchingover equipment."

1°Denki Roren, "Surveys-on the Impacts of Micro-Electronics .

and Our Policies TOitarda Technological Innovation," paper pre-sented at the 4th IMF World Conference for the Electrital andElectronics industries; Oct. 3- 5;_1983.

"Japan Labor Association; "A Special Study_ ConcerningTechnological InnoVatien and Labor - Management Relations,interim report. June 1983.

Effects of Programmable Automation EpMoymentBy User

Which people will face changing job oppor-unities depends on which industries are like -

y- to use programmable automation, when;vhere, and how, as well as on the capabilitiesf the technologies. Given the range of poten-ial applications described in chapter 3, it islossible to identify the industries as well ashe occupational groups-likely to be affected.[nded, because of its flexibility (and other atxibutes), PA can be used in a remarkably)road range of industries. In this regard, it is)ut one manifestation of the growing use of;omputer technologies taking place through-nit the economy. This section will discuss PAisers; the employment potential of PA pro-lucers (who also tend to be users) is discussed,ater in the chapter. .

The first and principal users of the technol=)gies addressed in this report have been firms

Industry.-an the so-called metalworking industriespri-mary metalS, fabricated metal products, elec-trical machinery (includes electronics), nonelec-trical machinery, transportation equipment,and inStruments'sparticularly the electricaland nonelectrical machinery and transporta-tion equipment industries.'s Together these in-duatries employed almost 10 million peoplein1980; the electrical and nonelectrical machin-ery and transportation equipment industriesemployed almost 8 million._ Their occupationalprofiles are shown in table 17. Other indus-tries, including_architectural and engineeringservices, have also ,begun to be significantusers of programmable automation; engineer-

"Industries designated by Standard Industrial Classification(SIC) codes 33-38.

"Ibid. (SIC 35.371.

124

Ch 4-Effects of Programmable Automation on Employment 113

Table 17:-Occupational Profiles of Manufacturinii Industries

Employment in Manufacturing industries by Major Occupational Group; 1980

IndustryAll

occupationsManagers

and officersProfessional

workersTechnicalworkers

Serviceworkers

Production,maintenance.construction, Clerical Sales wOrk-repair, mat. wOrkors eH

anal handling.and power.

plant workers

68.1 11.5 22All manufacturing 100.0 6.8 8.9 2.9 1.8

Food and kindred products 100.0 6.4 2.7 .7 3.1 73.2 10.0 3.9Tobacco_products 10(10 5.9 3.7 1.9 3.5 72.8 109 12Textile mill products 100.0 3.7 1.7 .9 2.2 81.9 8 8 _ 8

Apparel and other textile products .... 100:0 36 1.2 .2 1.2 83 2 9.1 1 4

Lumber and wood products. exceptfurniture 100.0 6.2 1.5 .8 2.1 81.4 6.4 1.7

Furniture and fixtures_ 100 0 5.3 2.2 .8 1.9 76.4 11.1 2.3

Paper and allied products 1010 5.3 4.3 1.5 1.7 74.3 10.5 2.4Printing and publishing 100.0 10.1 .9.9 1.0 1.7 46.6 21.1 7.4Chemicals and allied products 100.0 9.8 . 12.3 5.3 2.2 52.8 14 6 3.2Petroleum refining and related_ industnes 100.0 7.3 9.4 3.1 1.5 62.8 11.4 45Rubber and miscellaneous plastics

products 100.0 - 6.5 4.1 1.7 1.6 75.1 9.5 1.5

Leather and leather products 100.0 3.9 1.4 .3 1.3 80.6 10.4 2.0

Stone. clay. glass. and concreteproducts 100.0 7.3 3.1 1.4 1.4 75.6 9.0 2.0

Primary metal products 100.0 3.9 3.8 1.9 2.0 79.4 8.2 _.9

Fabricated motet products_ 100.0 8.8 4.2 2.1 1.6 73.7 98 t.9Machinery. except electncal and

transportation equipment 100.0 7.8 9.4 5.4 1 6 60.7 13.3 1.8

Electrical and electronic machtnery 100.0 6.4 12.3 6.2 1.4 60.3 12.3 1.0

Transportation equipment 100.0 5.8 13.1 3.9 2.2 64.7 _9.7 _.5

Instruments and_related products A 100.0 8.7 11.8 7.4 1.7 53.7 14.9 1.9

Miscellaneous manufacturingindustries 100.0 7.7 3.5 1.5 1.7 68.8 14.1 2.8

Percent Distribution of Employment in Manufacturing industries by Major Occupational Group, 1980

Industry Managers -endofficers

Professionalworkers

Techrucal Service_work-workers ere

I

_Production i

1maintenance.construction.co . Clencal_work(epee. fnatenai I Sales workersershandling. and I

pow_erplant I

workers i

All manufac,uring 1.328.160 1.404080 594.270 373.150 13.767.0401 2.322.400 438.710

Food and kindred products 107.750 45.360 12,000 52.000 1.241,080 169,730 66.910Tobacco products- -3.760 _2,380 1.220 _2230 _46.270 _8:960 -760Textile mill products 31.980 14.710 7.750 19.110 7t3,410 76,760 7.040Apparel and other textile products 45.820 15.500 2.250 15.290 1.057.890 116.190 18.420Lumber and wood products. except

furniture 41.070 9.890 - 5,090 13,520 534.720 . 41,920 11.060Furniture and fixtures 24.300 10,200 _1610 -6510 946,250 F -50.490 10;470Paper and allied products 37,340 30.190 10,500 11.570 519,530 .. 73,240 16.540Pnnting and publishing 126.820 124.270 12.620 20.980 612.420 264.290, 92.890Chemidats and allied Products 110.000 137.650 58.990 24.700 587.520 162.670 35.290Petroleum refining and related

Andustnes_. 14,790 19,030 8.290 3,080 127.290 23,040 9,170Rubber and miscellaneous plastics

Products 45.860 28.880 12.190 11,420 534.150 67.470 11.020Leather and leatherproducts 9.130 3.390 720 1030 190.440 24.640 4.840Stone. clay, glass. and concrete___products 48.720 20.930 1580 9.520 503.440 60.130 13.310

Pnmary metal products 47.550 46,350 22,320 23.540 956.430 - 98.230 10.680Fabricated metal products 103.670 67.110 33.650 25.750 1.164.180 154.800 30.800Machinery,except electncal and

transportation equipment 195.830 234.740 134.550 39.900 1.515.640 332.490 44.140Electntatind_elestmnic_machine 133.520 255.860 129.720 29:310 1.254.920 259900 20090Transportation equipment 106,320 240.400 72.110 40.480 -1,188,110 178.180 9.470Instruments and related products 61.500 82.460 52.840 12.130 381.320 106970 13.540Miscellaneous manufacturing - - -

industries 32,400 14.760 8.270 7.080 290.030 59.280 11.970

SOURCE: Bureau of Labor Stalls los. Occupational Employment in Manufacturing Industries. Bulletin 2133. September 1982.

125

114 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

ing and architectural services employed 557,000people in 1980."

Application of the PA technologies will growrelatively quickly among these early users.Their experience will facilitate further appli-cation of PA; including the integration of sys-tems. For example; GM's widely publicizedplan to have over 14,000 robots by 1990 re-flects not only the firm's size, but also its ex-perience with robots and its understanding ofhow and where to use them. Because use ofautomated production technologies, in partic-ular; will probably remain concentrated inthese industries through this decade, principalnear-term employment impacts will also beconcentrated in these industries.

Programmable automation will be appliedin a growing variety of industries because ofimproving capabilities; falling costs, and grow-ing experience with particular applications, aswell as the perceived effect on competitive-ness; Materials handling, assembly, simula-tion; and inventory control applications canbe used across the manufacturing sector; thiscontrasts with the more narrow market forrobotiC spot welding and spray painting, NCmachining, and CAD for electronic equipment.Already, industries such as food processing,textiles, apparel, and paper manufacturinghave begun to explore use of programmableautomation, especially robots. Applications oftheSe technologies will spread both within themantfatturing sector and outside of it; butSufficiently slowly that significant effects onemploeyment outside of the metalworking in-dustries are unlikely before 1990.

Some perspective on the unevenness of tech-nOrogy diffuSion, and its impact on employ-ment by industry, can be gained from data on

"Bureau of Labor Statistics, "Employment by Industry andOccupation. 1982 and Selected 1995 Alternatives," unpublisheddata on wage and Salary employment, 1983:

the spread of NC technology; In 1968; only 0.5percent of machine tools in use among metal-working industries in general were numericallycontrolled. The percentage was only slightlyhigher for nonelectrical.machinery industries.In the 1976 to 1978 period; the overall figurewas 2;0 percent; varying among industrieefrom 0;3 percent for metal stampings to 5.3percent for aircraft and parts The overall fig;ure was 4.7 percent by 1983; These figures un=derscore the fact that prOduction teclincilOgieetend to spread slowly and unevenly. Withinthe machine-tool industry itself, the propor=tion of NC machine touts was 2.6 percent in1973; 3.7 percent in 1976-78, and 6 percent in1983."

Firm size may affect the incidence of employ-ment impacts within and across industries. TOdate, most users of PA, especially the produc=tion-technologies; have been large firms. Suchfirms may continue to dominate as users be-cause they can more easily purchase equip=ment; buy or build on previous know-how,_ andotherwise afford to _automate." Industriesdominated by large firms may therefore ex-perience faster employment change than in-dustries dominated by smaller firms, otherthings being equal; the changes will come inlarger doses. On the other hand, larger-firmsgenerally have more capacity to transfer andretrain displaced personnel, making layoffsless likely. Also, supplier-buyer links betweenlarge and smaller firms may hasten the adop-tion of _programmable automation by smallerfirmi.* The domination of the aerospace andauto industries by a few large firms linked to

""The 13th American Machinist Inventory of MetalworkingEquipment 1983,"American Machinist, November 1983; andNational Machine Tool Builders' Association; 1983-84 Hand-book of the Machine Tool Industry.

"Steven M. Miller, Potential Impacts of Robotics on Menu-factuting Costs Within the Metalworking Industries, doctoraldissertation, Carnegie- Mellon University, 1983.

*So, too, will, improvement of low cost systems aimed atsmaller users.

126

Ch. 4Effects of Programmable Automation on Employment 115

a number of smaller suppliers can heighten theemployment impacts within those industries.*

Geographic IncidenceProgrammable automation will exacerbate

employment problems in certain geographicareas in the short term (i.e., the 1980's). In thelonger term, however, its impacts will be moregeneral.

Given the differing tendencies of differentindustries to use programmable automation,employment in the East North Central andMiddle Atlantic regions, plus individual Statessuch as California and Texas, are most likelyto be aff&ted during this decade, as well asthe next. Employment in such metalworkingindustries as automobiles and nonelectricalmachinery is concentrated in the East NorthCentral region, especially in Ohio, Michigan,and Illinois; the Middle Atlantic region is amajor source of industrial machinery; Califor-.:dier and Texas are major sources of ele6tricalmachinery and aerospace products. See figure15 for a comparison of regional differences inmanufacturing employment. These areas in-clude the six States that had 5 percent or moreof their employment in manufacturing and to-gether held over 42 percent of all manufactur-ing employees, according to the 1977 Censusof Manufacturers (latest version available)-

- California (9 percent); New York (8 percent),Pennsylvania (7 percent); Ohio (7 percent); Il-linois (7 percent); and Michigan (6 percent).

In the short term, areas most dependent onsingle firms or industries will be the most vul-nerable to the effects of employment change;

*On the other hand, the movement among major metalwork-ing firms toward using fewer suppliers (to im_prove quality con-trol) may shift supply business toward larger firms, which mayhave a greater propensity to automate. The extent of this move-ment varies among industries. It is especially pronounced inthe auto industry, for example. See Nancy Kingman, "OEMsPlan to Utilize Fewer Supplier Firms," American Metal Mar-

.' ket/Metalworking News; Oct: I0; 1983,

As the authors of an OECD study of job lossesin major inthistries across countries noted,"the proportion of the community's workersinvolved in the primary cutbacks" is the prin-cipal determinant of the effect of displacementand unemployment on a community." Thisproportion, and a related factor, the diversi-ty of the local economy, both affect the abili-ty of the local labor market to absorb displacedworkers. Such vulnerability, however, existsindependently of PA or any other t&hnology;lack of economic diversity has long beenknown to make local economies vulnerable toany changes in hiring by dominant employers.As table 18 shows, States with a lot of manu-facturing were likely to have experiencedabove-average unemployment over the past 7years, although other States also experiencedhigh unemployment.

The East North Central region is particular-ly likely to experience unemployment becauseof its association with the auto industry. Thatindustry is not only a major user of program-mable automation, but is also particularly sen-sitive to import competition and to changingconsumer car-buyinglhavior. Consequently,even before the auto industry's use of robotswas attracting much publicity, there was spec-ulation that industry employment might notre-attain the peak levels achieved in 1978 and1979. The same area is also experiencing joblosses associated with other industries, suchas the industrial, farm, and construction ma-chinery industries. These industries are notonly automating but have also been contract-ing due to import competition and the cyclicaldeclines in business.

Indeasingly, the employment impacts ofprogrammable automation will become dis-persed because of the broadening geographicdistribution of manufacturing activity. Over

"Robert B. McKersie and Werner &ngenberger, Job Lossesin Major Industries (Paris: OECD, 1983).

127

116 Computedied Manufabfun Aut OrnatlOn: Employment; Education, and the Workplace

Vic:kat!

Figure 15.Regional Manufatturing EmploymentEmployment as a percent of U.S. total, by State: 1977

Percent of total

Uriited States total ernployeeet-19.6 million

0.04 to 0.390.40 to 1.191.20 to 2.292.30 to 4.995.00 to 8.94

Change in employment, by State: 1967-77

Hawaii 0

SOURCE: U.S Department of Commerce. Bureau toHlrCethsus..1

Percent change

21.7 to --5.15.0 to 4.9

5.0 to 19.920.0 to 44.945.0 to 114.3

Ch. 4Effects of Programmable Automation on Emgorment 117

Table 18.Unemployment Rates by State,a 1976.82

1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981, 1982

Annual average. rate (%) 7.2 6.7 5.7 5.6 6.9 7.3 9.3

Distribution of State unemployment relative to averageNumber of yearsabove average

Number ofStates Identity of States

0 14 Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Carolina, NorthDakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Wyoming

1 2 Maryland; Montana2 4 Connecticut, Georgia, Missouri, Vermont3 5 Kentucky, Massachusetts, Nevada, SOUth Carolina, Wisconsin4 6 Arizona, Florida, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana5 7 Arkansas, Louisiana, Maine_, New Jersey, New Mexico, Ohio, Tennessee6 4 California; Delaware; Mississippi, New York7 9 Alabama, Alaska, Distriet of Columbia, Michigan, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island,

Washington, West Virginia51

aincluding the District of Columbia.

SOURCE U.S Department of Labor. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Current Population Survey.

the last two or three decades, manufacturinghas grown in the South and in the Western re-gions of the country; aided in part by govern-ment spending. Between 1960 and 1970; thenumber of manufacturing employees in theNortheast was almost constant; while in allother regions it grew sUbstantially. Between1970 and 1980; manufacturing employinentfell in the Northeast, remained constant in theNorth Central region, and grew relativelyrapidly in the South' and West. By 1980, over43 percent of manufacturing employment wasin the South and West regions.18

The growth in manufacturing employmentin the South and West reflects lower produc-tion costs in those regions compared with theNortheast and North Central, as well as agrowth of the aerospace and electronics indus-tries in California and several SOuthern States.These areas have benefited from space pro-gram funding in the 1960's and defense pro-gram funding since the 1950's. Between 1951and 1976, for example; the South's share ofmilitary prime contract awards rose from 11to 25 percent, while the West's share grewfrom 16 to 31 percent." Defense and space- "James A. Orr; FliTruo SU:nada, and Atsusni Qeilce, "U.S.-Japan Comparative Study of Employment Adjustment," draft,U.S. Department of Gabor and Japan Ministry of Labor, Nov.9, 1982.

'''Eileen Appelbaum, '"High Tech' and the Structural Un-employment of the Eighties,' paper presented at-the AtnericanEconomic Association Meeting, Washington, D.C., Deck 28,1981.

R&D has, in turn, led to commercial manufac-ture of such associated products as calculatorsand semiconductors being concentrated in thesame regions;

The dispersion of manufacturing does not,however, preclude regional variation in therate and type of technology change. A recentstudy of geographic patterns in the use of met-alworking equipment found:

The more advanced production technologiesare being introduced in the higher skill, higherwage areas of the industrial Midwest whileless of these technologies or less advanced ver-sions are being introduced to a lesser degreein the low wage, lower skill labOr markets ofthe South and West.2° 1

The authors suggest that there is a "match-ing of capital with labor by region," a phenom-enon that will influence the geographic inci-dence of technological displacement and asso-ciated unemployment.

The dispersal of manufacturing activity andthe growth of service industries among regions-have allowed regional ed-oriomies to diversify;This has made most regions less sensitive tochanges in manufacturing employment.* One

"John RCes, et al., "The Adoption of New Technology in theAmerican Machinery Industry, ' Occasional Paper No. 71, Max-well School of Citizenship and Public Affairs; Syracuse Univer-sity, August 1983.

*Note, however, that encouragement of justin-time supplysystems by the auto and other industries may encourage re-centralization (for the auto industry, at least. in L'ae Midwest).

129

118 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

indicator of how widely PA use is dispersedis the distribution of service centers and dem-onstration facilities established by vendors.Vendor literature and the trade 'Pres§ Suggestthat such facilities are distributed quite broad,ly across the country.

Another influence on geographic incidenceis the combination of PA with advanced tele-communications systems linking facilitiesacross a region or even across countries. Forexample, Lockheed has found that its use ofCAD and CAM has affected its interfaeilityactivity.

Inter-company use of CADAM-generateddata through an interactive system usingsatellites allows for the transmission ofCADAM models between four Lockheed corn-iianieS that are now on-line. Once the remain-ing companies have been added to the net-work, said fa LoCkheed official], "we candesign at one plant, program at another andmanufacture at still another plant,""

Automation producers face similar prospects.For example, ASEA Robot Co. has facilitiesin Detroit, White Plains, New York City;Houston, and Los Angeles, and it installsrobots around the country. It adopted a com-munications system "that will allow ASEAengineers in New Berlin (Wis;) to work directlywith technicians installing equipment any-where in the nation" through computer con-nections; 22 Computer and telecommunicationslinks; together with PA systems, enable man-ufacturers to spread a given complement ofpersonnel across a large geographic area andavoid fully staffing separate local facilities.

There is also an international dimension togeographical impacts; In particular, the avail=ability of programmable automation may influence manufacturers' decisions about lecat=ing production in the_United States or abread,Some proponents of PA argue that a principalbenefit may be to stem or reverse the exodusof manufacturing jobs to Other countries.

""Lockheed Exec: 30B Automation Market by 1990,"Anwri-can Metal Market/Metalworking News, Sept. 26, 1983.

"Robert Fixiner, "Swedish Robots Pick Wisconsin" (Madi-son). Capita/ Times, Mar. 5, 1983:

There is some evidence that the cost-reducingeffect of PA has motivated companies to lo-cate more electronics facilities in the United.States than they might have previously. Forexample, GM-Delco recently expanded U.S.production instead of going overseas. 23 Also,AT&T attributes its plans to consolidate mostof its consumer telephone manufacturing with-in the United States to automation; as well asto the benefits of domestic location for respon-siveness to changing technologies and _con-sumer preferences.-Accorcling to an AT&T of-ficial:

Far Eaat, Central and South American la-bor rates are low ... but we are designing andbuilding our products for automated assem-bly, displacing labor with capital ...Changes in our manufacturing operations gen-erally represent changes in technologymoving from electromechanical phones toelectronic_phones. Because that technologyhas spread throughout the product line, anda high percentage of the value added a prod-uct line is electronics, we are able to useautomated assembly instead of the human as-sembly line."However; cost is not the only reason why

producers choose to locate offshore. Whereproducers are motivated-by-a-desire-to-be-near _a foreign market, especially if local-contentlaws there require local production, no reduc-tion in costs at home will keep such produc-tion in the United StateS. Thus, auto and elec-tronics producers continue to operate, expand,and buy from overseas production facilities.Digital Electronic Corp., for example, expectsthat half of its materials requirements will befilled by overseas sources over the next 3 to5 years, whereas 15 percent is now." If, on theother hand, programmable automation encour-ages more small-batch production of goodsaimed exclusively at the domestic market, es-

"John Holusha; Electronics Back in U.S," The NewYork Miles, June 20, 1983-

"Laurel Nelson-Rowe, "AT&T Shifting More of Its ConsumerPhone Manufacturing to U.S.," Communications Week, Jan.30,_ 1984:

"Nancy Kitignium; "OEMs Plan to Utilize Fewer SupplierFirms," American Metal Itlarket/Metrilworurig News, Oct. 10;1983.

130

Ch. 4Effects of Programmable Automation on Employment -119

pecially goods tailored to specific regional orethnic preferences, then domestic manufactur-ing may benefit even if overseas locations re-main most economical for mass production.*Insofar as multinational corporations stand-

*The time-savings benefits of computerized apparel equip-ment may help domestic firms compete with importers becausethey can deliver more quickly. "When a customer can ordersomething and have it in his store in 2 weeks, there's no waythe imports can compete,". according to one clothing maker.gee Fran 'lesser, "Clothing Makers Try to Sew Up Labor Costs,Foreign Competition," The Atlanta Constitution, Sept. 21,1983.

ardize products across companies or draw onstandard components, it may be harder to iso-late production for the U.S._market from pro-duction for world markets. This prospect hasbeen raised by the discussions of the "worldcar."** It is also becoming an issue for pro-duction of automation hardware (see ch. 7).

**Ford, for example, has a computer and communicationssystem linking engineers in Europe and the United States forautomotive design and analysis work. "Computer-Aided Engi-neers: Worldwide Dedicated Computers Analyze Into Struc-tures," Tooling and Production, October 1983.

Effects of Programmable Automation onOccupational Employment

Occupational impacts of individual automa-tion technologies and of accompanying majorprocess changes will vary enormously amongindustries. In the absence of detailed companyand industry studies of the deployment of,labor across the economy, data on employ-ment by occupation are the only means ofcounting people potentially exposed to the riskof displacement.* They can also be used todevelop inferences about new jobs and occupa-dons. Such estimates, it must be understood,are rough at best.

Selected Detailed Occupational GroupsEngineers

In many ways, engineers are a central fac-tor in the employment chafiges expected tooccur with programmable automation. Engi-neers develop automation technologies; theywork with them; yet they are not immune tobeing displaced by them.

Engineers contribute to both_ the productionand use of PA. The mix of engineers by disci-pline found in an enterprise varies with thenature of the product or research topic; but

Such data are principay avtUable through the Bureau ofLabor Statistics (BLS), although some are also available fromthe Bureau of the Census, the National Science Foundation, andfrom private sources. Most data presented in this chapter arefor 1980. which represents essentially prerecession conditionsand conditions prior to much of the recent growth in PA use.

2r+-452 i i - A4 - 9 : 21. 3

in general, electrical/electronic and mechanicalengineers design equipment ands ystems, andindustrial/manufacturing engineers as well aselectrical and mechanical engineers des4k-ap-plications. Different industries have difiliRntneeds for special engineering disciplines, suchas aeronautical/astronautical, chemical, andmetallurgical engineers. Typically, employersprefer that engineers have at least a bachelor'sdegree, although individuals without suchtraining can be certified by the Society of Man-ufacturing Engineers to perform certain typesof production engineering, and sometimes in-dividuals attain the title of engineer thrptighpromotion from other positions. Engineerswho perform research usually hold advanceddegrees. The employment share_of manufac-turing engineers with degrees reflects the factthat employers and schools alike have histor-ically held this engineering discipline in lowerregard than others (although this view ischanging, as discussed later).**

CURRENT EMPLOYMENT TRENDS

Total employment of engineers in 1980 wasover 1.1 million, including about 580,000 em-ployed in manufacturing. In 1982, nearly

**N.b., statistics collected by BLS treat manufacturing en-gineering as a subset of industrial engineering, although in thevernacular the term industrial engineer has a more limitedmeaning.

131

120 Computerized Manufacturing AutoMation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

590,000 engineere were employed in manufac-turing induetries.

Engineers have become more prevalent inmanufacturing industriee over the past severalyears. Sectoral employment of engineers grewdespite the recessions,_ although individual in-dustries suffered declines in engineering em-ployment between 1980 and 1982. Engineerscomprise nearly a third of professional andtechnical pereonnel across the manufacturingsector. The electrical and nonelectrical machin-ery, transportation equipment, and a few otherrelatively technology-intensive industries (e.g.,instruments and chemicals) together employover 80 percent of the engineers working inmanufacturing industries.26 The number anddistribution of engineers reflects many factors,particularly changes in process technology and

..patterns in defense spending (the principal fac-tor behind employment trends for aeronauticalengineers). See table 19. The relatively largegrowth in electrical engineeringemployment,for example, reflects the spread of microelec-tronics across various products and processes.

Technology change and other factors arecausing growth in design and production engi-neering activity, which in turn supportsgrowth in demand for engineers. In somecases, programmable automation is merely avehicle for engineering. activity motivated byother factors; in others, the nature of PA itselfis a cause of growth in engineering. The useof CAD, for example, may be deeotialed withincreased design engineering activity becauseit makes design cheaper and therefore easierto do more often.* This is especially likely in

" "Changing EmploYment Patterns of Scientists, Engineers,and Technicians in Manufacturing Industries: 1977-1980." Na-tional Science Foundation, 1982.

This would be similar to the experience with computer-baSedtechnologies for financial Services, the adoption of which wasassociated with growth in certain banking transactions.

industriee (e.g., special semiconductors) whereproduct differentiation and customization areincreasingly important. In some indnetries(e.g., computers and aerospace); CAD/CAE fa:cilitates faster advances in product tech-nology, allowing, more (and more complex)products to be introduced in a given period oftime.**

Design requirements of FMS and auto-'mated storage and retrieval systems (AS/RS)are increasing producer needs for engineers.Cincinnati Milacron, for example; repOrts us-ing thouearide of engineering hours to analyzeFMS needs of potential customers;27 Acrossmanufacturing generally; prodnction engineer:ing activities are growing becauee prograin-mable automation and market factors are fo-cusing attention on product quality, produc-tion processes, and the links betWeen designand 'production. The growth of PA productsand markets is itself a source (albeit limited)of increased engineering design and produc-tion activity and employment. The more corn-plex,the application of PA, and/or the greaterthe change in the production process, thegreater the investment in engineeringwill be.

As was suggested earlier; the spread of pro-grammable automation influences themix ofengineers. In jparticular, it is contribUting(because of changes in materials_ technology,as well as the growing Concern, with manufac-turing processes) to a revival of interest inthe discipline of manufeetriring engineering;schools report greater interest among students

**According to Clarence Borgineyer of Pratt & Whitney Air-craft,''It takes us approximately as long to design an engineas it did in 1956, but engine technology has grown infinitelymore complex. We couldn't begin to solve today's_ problems withyesterday's computers.!! See "Maker of Aircraft Engines TiesData Base to CAE Applications on Divisional Scale." Comput-

erworld, Sept. 12, 1983,"Lewd Giesen, "Industry Interest Sparks FMS Sales Hopes

for '84," American Metal Market/Metalworking News, Dec. 5,1983.

Table 19.-Number and Distribution of Engineers, 1980

MetalWorking_Machinery and

All manuiacturing equipment

Office, computing,and accounting Electrical industrial

machines apparatus

Elifiettenittomponentt and Motor vehicles and

acre_snrieS equipment Aircraft and parti

Engineers 579:677 2.3% 11,930 3.2% 48.303 11.2% 10.602 4:5% 34,077 6.1% 17,804 2.3% 75,587 11.5%

Electrical 173:647 0.9% 1,671 0.5% 31,008 7.2% 5,818 2.4% 23,591 4.2% 466 0.1% 5,367 0.8%

Industrial , 71,442 0.4% 1,963 0.5% 6.125 1.4% 1,414 0.6% 3,031 0,5% 3,921 0.5% 5,809 0.9%

-MechariinaL____J: 122:328 0.6% .6,718 1.2% 3.970 0.9% 2,12E1 0.9% 2;769 0.5% 3,959 0.5% 11,36d 12%

SOURCE. Bureau of Labor Statistics. "Employment by industry andOccupation; 1980 and Projected 1990.- unpublished data on wage and salary employment.

1.32

Ch. 4Effects of Programmable Automation on Employment 121

in pursuing a manufacturing engineering ma-jor. Also, because of their dependence on sys-tems analysis and the need for developmentof computer hardware and software; PA pro-ducers and users alike appear willing and ableto substitute computer scientists_ and systemsanalysts for engineers. PA is thiiS likely tohave similar employment impact8 on engi:neers and systems analysts because of theiroverlapping responsibilities, although systemsanalyst employment is lower overall* (seetable 20).

A review of want-ads published by PA pro-ducers and users over the last 2 to 3 yearsshows that companies generally list engineer;ing and computer science degrees as alterna=tive criteria for eligibility when recruiting fOrboth product and applications developmentPositions. Among engineering degrees desired,electricatengineering is listed most frequent-ly, OleSe ly followed by mechanical engineering.

Flexible hiring criteria reflect in part agrowth in interdisciplinary work arribng engineers. Production and use of PA equipmenthelp to spur interdisciplinary engineering be-cause PA combines electrical, electronic, and

*In 1980, 42,409 computer systems analysts were employedin manufacturing. While manufacturing's share of computersystems analyst, operations analyst; and systems analyst em-ployment fell overall dunng the 1970'S, the proportions em-ph:VW by metalworking industries generally rose. Between 1970and 1978. the percent employment of computer specialists rosefor all manufacturing (and for all industries combined); and inmetalworking industries while the proportions of engineerS andengineering and stientific teChnicians fell slightly.

Table 20.Employment of Computer SystemsAnalysts; 1980

Number PercentAll industries 201;999 0:20%All manufacturing_ ...... 42,404 020Metalworking machinery and

equipment 336 0.09Office, computino, and accounting

machines 6,913 1:60Electrical industrial apparatus 581 0.24Elebtronic components and

accessories .............. 1,146 0.20Motor vehicles and equipment 945 0.12Aircraft and parts 3,838_1a.54_SOURCE: Bureau of labor Statistics. "Employment by Industry and Occupation,

1980-and Projected 1990," Unpublished data on wage and salary em-ployment.

mechanical systems technologies. In addition,design and production activities often'mergewith the use of PA systems, especially CAD/CAE systems that allow for analysis of pro-dUCtion requirements and processes.

The rise in interdisciplinary engineering andsystems analysis suggests that college train-ing for production engineers may becoine in=creasingly necessary over time--i.e., it maybecome more difficult for individuals litekittgcollege degrees to rise through the ranks andobtain engineering jobs. Confirming this as-sumption, 6;600 manufacturing engineers pre-dieted in a 1979 survey that 50 percent ofplant work forces in the automated environment will be engineers and technicians. Inter-estingly, while 49 percent of all respondentshad at least a B.A;; 61 percent of those be-tween 20 and 29 years of age did.28 However;recent want:EidS_Stiggest that at least amongtoday's users of programmable, automation;employers- may be_willing to accept_severaiyears of relevant experience in lieu of a tech-nical college degree for some engineeringpositions.

The growth in engineering activity causedby Or accompanying programmable automa-_den will not neeeSsinily raise engineeringemployment among user firms, although itmay raise it elsewhere: Many users appear tofavor turnkey purchases and -rely on vendorsto meet occasional ne4ds for applicationsengineering, rather than expand their ownstaffs. The Upjohn Institute, for example,found this to be the case among robot usersgenerally.29 Also, applications engineeringservices are available from growing numbersof third-party engineers employed in consult;ing and service firms. These engineers maysubstitute for in -house staff for either pro-ducers or users; performing applications en-gineering and planning (and sometimes con-tributing to product development); For exam-ple, increasing numbers of programmable con-

,

""The Manufacturi73g-Engineet-4-ParesenrantM.Mare7--special report to the mernbersiTip_of SME; May28, 1979.

"H. Alhuri Hunt and Timothy L. Hunt, Human Resources Im-plications ofRbtiotics, The W. E. Upjohn Institute for Employ-ment Research, 1983.

133

122 Computerized Manufacturing Automat len: Employment; Education, and the Workplace

troller installations are handlOd by third-partyfirms."

Engineering employment in engineeringservices firms has been growing generally, andif PA consulting and service firMS continue tothrive, the share of engineera erriployed inManufacturing firms (per se) may continue tofall. Although the "proportion of manufactur-ing professional and teChnical employees rep-resented by engineers has been rising, the pro-portion of engineers employed in the manufac-turing sector is deelining. Between 1970 and1978,the manufacturing sector share of engi-neer employment fell from 54 to 50 percent,while the (miscellaneous service share rosefrom under 13 to 17 percent (see table 21);Within the service sector, engineering employ,ment is concentrated in the engineering andarchitectUral service industry (a group in,cluding a large proportion of self-employedprofessional engineers). That industry was thelargest employer of engineers in 19823)

PROJECTED EMPLOYMENT IMPACTS

OTA's cane studies and other.evidence sug-gest that, while demand for engineers will in-crease during this decade, automation willeventually dampen the rate of growth of theiremploy-ment in manufacturing industries. Thisis likely becauSe: 1) computer-aided design andengineering increases the output per engi;neer;* 2) anticipated improvements hi Suchareas aa equipment- interfaces will solve Someof today's problems in applications engineer-ing; and 3) in the long term, if not sooner, theremay be some substitution of technician jobsfor engineering jobs (see the next Section).

Although the complexity of PA installationswill grow, so will the capability of automated

"OTA case study."RonWd E. Kutscher,"Future Labor Market Conditions for

Engineers," paper prepared for theNational Research_ CouncilSymposium on Labor - Market Conditions for Engineers. Feb.

2, 1.984.'"For example, Clu-isler expects that its expanded use of CAD

will not lead to expansion in employment of engineers and de-signers using the technology. Rather, the company expects todevote time saved in design and analysis to such other tasksas tooling and product testing. See "Chrysler Expanding CADNetwork;" Automotive News, July 12, 1982:

V.1

Table 21.=-Percent Distribution of EngineeringEmployment by IndUStry Group, 1970 and 1978

Economic sector 1970 1978

A_griculture, forestry, and fishing 01:7138

Mining20:4207

Construction 8.29 ,7 :08

Manufacturing 54.26 50.08

Durables 45 82 42.16

Primary metals 2:2_ 2.01

Fabricated metals ... 2.46 2:44Machinery; except electrical and

transportation equipment 8.31 8.80

Electrical and electronicmachinery......... ....... 1123 12.37

Transportation equipment 11'.97 10:53

Automobiles 2.17 2.40

Aircraft 8.53 7.02

Professional and scientificinstruments 2:36 2:48

Transportation; 7.99 8.55

Wholesale and retail trade 4 32 4.44

Finance, insurance, and real estate:::. 0.71 0.75

ServicesCommercial R&D .........

12.731:06

1017.1:42

Engineering and architecture 7.04 9.63

aOther public btilitiet.NOTE: Percentages do not sum to 100 due to exclusion of government employ-

ment figures. -SOUR6E: U.S: Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor-Statlatios, The National

IndustD.Occupatlon Employment Matrix, 1970: 1978, and Projected

1990, April 1981,

engineering aids; such as simulation systems,to deal with this complexity. A major aero-space firm, for example, has predicted that itsengineering andrelated technical staff require-ments may fall by as much as one-third oncethe company achieves is automation goals;for some production engineering tasks, thedrop may be as high as 80 percent."The aero-space industry repreSents an extreme, case,because the complexity and the stringent qual-ity standards of aerospace products willfpro'o-ably drive major aerospace firms to greaterlevels Of computerization and systems integra-tion, and on a faster timetable, than firms inother industries.

Various trends in industrial organizationwill also work to slow the rate of growth inengineering employment. For example; thegrowth in engineering consulting and servicefirms means that fewerenginers will be employed than would be if producers and Userssatisfied their needs for engineers internally.

"OTA case study.

134

Ch. 4Effects of Programmable Automatton on Employment 123

Indeed. recent and_anticipated growth in en-gineering and architectural service firms hasbeen attributed in part to shortages of certaintypes of engineersin effect, fewer engineerscan be spread more thinly by this means.33 An-other factor is growth in the number of auto-mation users who also produce automatedequipment and systems; Such user-producerswill draw on engineers involved with their ownuse of automation to produce automatedequipment and systems; One reason thatWestinghouse, for example; decided to enterthe robot market was management's realiza-tion that it already had vitalin-house engineer-ing expertise." Moreover, when Westinghouseacquired Unimation, it consolidated its robot-ics work force, since the combined forces of thetwo firms were believed to be too large."

SHORTAGES OF ENGINEERS

In the near term; engineering employmentdepends primarily on market conditions anddefense spending. Thus; even though they"need" engineers to develop new products;machine-tool builders have laid off engineersbecause of depressed sales; alsoi recent engi-neering graduates have had difficulty gettingjobs because of the recessions.36 Historically,engineers have undergone cycles of* shortageand surplus; despite ambiguous evidence,many in industry now believe that a shortageof engineers does or will exist. For example,the Electrtinic Industries Association recent-ly forecast a shortage of 113,000 electrical andcomputer engineers by 1987, based on fore-casts of engineering graduates and employ-ment targets reported in a survey of 815 man-ufacturing faalities employing over 736,000people:37 However; employer survey data aregenerally considered unreliable by employ-

Inclastrial Outlook; WasMngton, D.C., 1983."Laura Conigliaro and Christine Chien, "Computer Inte-

grated ManufactUring." Prudential-Bache Securities, Aug. 2,1983.

"Westinghouse, Revamps Robotics; 40 Jobs Lost," ChicagoSun-Times, May 22, 1983.

36Lauri Gieson, "Engineering Layoffs Raise Questions Aboutthe Domestic Indlistry's Future Strength," American MetalMarket/Metalworking News, June 18, 1983.

"Bill Leberis. "Study_ Predicts Major Engineer Shortage."Computerworld, JOly 11, 1983.

meat analysts. The shortcomings of this par-ticular survey, for example, were addressed atthe February 1984 National Research Coun-cil Symposium on Labor-Market Conditionsfor Engineers._Drawing on more comprehensive data, the

National Scienc Foundation (NSF)_ has con-cluded from a f rthcoming study of science,engineering, an technician_ (SET) personnelneeded by defens and civilian industries be-twn 1982 and 19 7 that (under conservativeassumptions regar 'rig the supply to SEToccupations):

1. the only engineering, discipline that willexperience a shortage, regardless of mac-roeconomic conditions and defense emspenditUres, is aeronauticalhistronautical(although the sharp drop in the market foraero/astro engineers in 1982-83 may havemade this less likely);

2. under stagnant economic conditions andwith low defense expenditures, no otherengineering discipline will experience ashortage; and

3. with economic growth and high defenseexpenditures electrical engineers might bein short supply."

NSF and others note that even for a.special-ized occupational category such as engineers,the supply of labor includes new graduates andimmigrants. It also includes movement infrom other occupations and movements be-tween disciplines. Such in-mobility is easier forsome disciplines (e.g., electrical and electronic)than for others (e.g., aeronautical and astro-nautical) among engineert3.36

'"Projected Employment Scenarios Show_Possible.Shortage'in Some Engineering_ arid Computer Specialties;"source Studies Highlights, National Science Foundation, Feb.23, 1983. Also, note that "existing Federal programs do notcollect data on shortages of workers in specific occupations; suchdata would be very expensive to collect and 'because _of theircomplexity their reliability would be questionable." _See NealH. Rosenthal, "Shortages of Machinists: An Evaluation of theInformation," Monthly Labor Review, July 1982.

"Jean E. Vanski. "Projected Labor Market Balance in En-gineering and_ Computer Specialty Occupations: 1982-1987."..paper prepared for the Symposium on LaborMarket Conditionsfor Engineers, National Research Council, Feb. 2, 1984.

135

24 'Computerized Manufacturing Automation; Employment; Education, and the Workplace

Several factors may explain the differencesn perception about engineer availability; For:he purposes of this study, a principal factorappears to be that employers desire person-nel with very specific skills and experience;qualities that data available to modelers (andsurveys tallying employment goals) may notreveal. For example, a recruiter from Xeroxrecently observed:

We're looking for hardware design engi-neers and some Software people . Many ofthe resumes we see are from people right outof school. Unfortunately, there'S nothing fizzthem.4°

Because it takes time to train engineers andfor them to acquire relevant experience, thisproblem is hard to overcome, especially wheretechnologies are changing rapidly. Further.more, there is no way to objectively measurethe ability of employers to make do with sec-ond-Choice job candidates, or to restructuretheir work. On the one hand, such steps bringlabor supply into balance with demand; On theother hand, they raise questions abont the ade-quacy of the quality of labor used to meet oc-cupational demands. Also, employees may pre-fer graduates with the highest grades and/orthose from the top schools; a group obvious=ly much smaller than the total graduate OW.

In timeemployers may well find that a com-bination Oflewer engineers and automated en-gineering aids will help them to stabilize theirengineering work forces and overcome laborquality problems. Such an approach appearsto be taken now with production workers; itmay come later for professional and technicworkers.

CURRENT EMPLOYMENT TRENDS

Technicians employed in industry are clas-sified as engineering, science, health, or other(not elsewhere classified);Engineering techni-cians, the principal group within durable man-ufacturing, include the categories of draftsmen, electrical/electronic engineering, indus-trial engineering, mecha4cal engineering;other engineering; NC tool programers mayalso be considered engineering technicians.Computer programers (business, scientific;and technical) are another important class oftechnicians in the manufacturing industry. In1980, combined employment of_engineeringtechnicians, NC tool programers, and comput-er programers was about 1.3 million; it wasabout 508,000 in manufacturing. In\1982, thetotal-industry and manufacturing levels were1.5 million and 518,000, respectively (see tnble22).

PROJECTED EMPLOYMENT IMPACTS

-Technicians are becoming_prominent in PtA

applications engineering. For example, onecompany visited by OTA has developed \anumber of robot applications by teaming en-gineers with technicians. However, it is notlikely that automation will result in a prolifera-tion of narrow technician groups (e.g., "robottechnicians") for several reasons; Programing;,and other preparatory activities can occur rel-atively infrequently, while production proc-eSSeS and plants generally involve a varietyOf equipment, making dedicated applicationsplanning or other support-persOnnel unlikelyin most cases.

OVerall growth among the ranks of techni-cians dOes not preclude declines in individualcategories. CAD, for example; will reduce de-inland for draftsmen, unless trends in productmarkets lead design activity to grow substan-tially.4' Increases in productivity throughCAD are generally measured as reductions intime relative to conventional drafting to per-form a given task; partictilarly fir detailing,revisions, or tests of desiOs las distinct from

"Tupperware, for example, increased drafting employmentafter adopting CAD because the "department is able to pro-duce more." See Joan Faulkner, "Computer-Assisted Drafting,"The Providence journal, Oct. 16, 1983./

1361

TechniciansA variety of technological and economic fac-

tors are contributing to the growth of techni-cian employment in industry; the growingnumbers and responsibilities of teclmicianssuggest they are the new "skilled workers" ofthe economy.

°Katherine Hefner, "Job Fair ShoWs Firms Not Seeking En-try-Level DPers," ComputerWorld, May 23, 1983.

Table 21Combined Employment of Engineering Tichnitlans; 1.1,C Tool Programers; and Computer Programers, 1980

All industries

All

manufacturing

0111c8 computing Electrical Electronic

architecturt add machinm ad and LtoUnting industrial components and Motor vehicles

surveying services elelpmen1 machines apparatus accessories and epuipmen1

IM1.111mMISPi101.

_bat_

and pads

'Eogirteing

Keit tflitAPt 1;251;955 115% 139,852 2.16% 157,550 2810% 10,303 2.77% 39858 9,25% 10107. . 315967 0,34 116,423 0,57 95,988 17.24 6,693 1,80 1.961 1,15 306

Electricallelettronic

358,077 0,39 131,014 0.64 5,814 1.04 1,435 0.39 32,182 7.17 4501Industrial

_engineering', 32;418 0.03 19134 .0,09 3,670 0.66 755 0.21 NA NA 782kleCnaniQl

engineering 18452 005 40;775 0.20 2,269 0,41 583 0,16 1,577 0,14 148loolorogrmrs; NC 11907 001 _9,371 0,05 869 0.16, 1,187 012 415 01 100Compote ptogtrqrS 226;182 0-,24 *522 029 3,303 0.59 755 0.20 19,601 1,55 726

SOURCE Bureau al Labia( Slats, "Employment by Industry and Occupalion, IRO and Projected 1990" unpublished dala on wage and salary employment

137

424% 33;783 6,05% 9,182 1.19% 29225

1:3 3356 0,68 2,118 0.27 4,751

1:89 21351 3.82 434 0.06 5,494.

013 197 0.09 537 0.07 1,461

0.31 1,796 012 2,413 011 8,920

0.04 .. 352 006 _NA_ _Nk 1,076

0,3 2;056 0.37 0,15 4168_4166

446%

0.72

0.84

0.22

1.36

0,16

0.42

138

126 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

design, per se). Fewer drafting hours, and pre-sumably fewer drafters, are necessary to per-form a given amount of work. AlSo, broaderdistribution of terminals and workstations, in-creased CAD/CAE system capabilities, andimproved interactivity reduce the rationale fordelegating drafting, programing, or data in-put to specialists. However, the tendency totrain and use existing draftsmen in CAD op-erations is one reason why demand for themis likely to continue for quite some time."

Also, anticipated improvement§ in equip-ment integration and interface§ will reduce theoccasion for programing. For example, CAD/CAE stations are being developed that willautomatically generate (and test) programs forrobots or machine tools, and production equip-

"OTA case studies: want-ads.

ment is being supplied with increasingly easy-to-use software; reducing theneed for separateNC tool programers or robot programers.However, development of such systems is on-going; and stand-alone NC equipment is like=ly to remain the norm throughout this decade.

As in the case of engineers; trends in in-thiStrial organization may also shape employ-ment opportunities for technicians; First; thespread of programmable automation is ex-pected to alter design interactions betweenprime manufacturers and their suppliers.Automobile and aerospace manufacturers, forexample, are increasing computer-links withsuppliers for transmission of design specifics=Lions: This trend could _diminish drafter de;mand among supplier& Second, CAD may in=fiuence companies' decisions on whether to dotheir own drafting or have it done on the out-

Photo credit: Beloit Corp.

Computer-aided de§igh system "menu" for drafting; with light pen

139

Ch. 4Effects of Programmable Automation an Employment 127

side. A shift to outside drafting, under theassumption that special service firms will bemore efficient and productive in drafting ac-tivities, would further compress overall de-mand for draftsmen. Growth in the engineer-ing services market for CAD systems sug-gests that demand for outside drafting, andperhaps some accompanying demand for out-side technicianS, may be strong. The manufac-turing share of technicians fell between 1970and 1978 largely because of a growth in theservices share ;43 Trends in the 1970's reflecta rapid growth in product complexity and de-sign requirements and the use of both manualand simple CAD systems; the continuation ofthese trends is thus uncertain;

In particular, manufacturers who have thepotential to link CAD to production or otherequipment may become less interested inbuying outside drafting services as designbecomes more important in their operations.One research center; for example, created anew job category; "CAD/CAM operator," andhired technicians to work with CAD systemsas an alternative to contracting with outsideparties for drafting work,44_ Some manufactur-ers may_ use their own and outside personnelat the offices of new CAD service firms, whichprovide computer equipment time and tech!.nical support to companies unable to affordtheir own CAD facilities (see ch. 7).

SUPPLY AND UTILIZATION FACTORSIt is difficult to gauge whether the-supply

of technicians will be adequate, because per-sons can become technicians through_manyavenues that may or may not. entail formal"technician training." As Will be described inchapter 6, there is evidence that employers arebeginning to prefer formal training for tech-

"U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, TheNational Industry-Occupation Employment Matrix, 1970, 1978,and Projected 1990. Bulletin 2086 (Washington, D.C.: U.S.Government Printing Office; April 1981). Almost 5a percentof engineering_ and science technicians were employed in man-ufacturing in 1970; almost 48 percent were in 1978. During thatperiod, the proportion employed in services rose from over 20percent to almost 24 percent.

"OTA case study.

nicians, and to offer such training to prepareemployees for programmable automation; inaddition, independent; outside trainingavailable to individuals to prepare for tech-nician careers. Because their educational re-quirements are less (in terms of time, money;and rigor) than those of engineers and scien-tists, the supply of technicians can be in-creased much faster through appropriatetraining. This will tend to support proportion-ate growth in technicians as a class, althoughit is premature to forecast growth in specificcategories.

Because programmable automation lowersthe skill requirements for several engineeringand production tasks; technicians can and do,perform work that previously was consideredeither professional or skilled trade work. Whilethis may always have taken place, PA i6 like=ly to make the substitution possibilities moreobvious and numerous. The fact that growthof technician employmeiit in manufacturingbetween 1977 and 1980 exceeded the growthrate for both scientists and engineers also sug-gests that technicians are being substitutedfor other types of personnel. Growing flexibili-ty in staff-mg again suggests that conventionaloccupatilnal descriptions and staffing conven-tions are of limited use for gauging futureemployment patterns.

Production and Related WorkersThis broad category includes "all skilled,

semiskilled, and unskilled workers performingmachine and manual tasks involving produc-tion, Maintenance, construction, repair, ma-terials handling, and powerplant operations,"as defined by the Bureau of Labor. Statistics(BLS). It contains the bulk of the occupationsmost directly vulnerable to displacement fromprograntmable automation, as well as frompast technological changes. Production work-ers have varied educational backgrounds andskill ley*, but are less likely to have collegetraining than are ;other occupational groupsin manufacturing. They tend to acquire theirskills on the job rather than through 4utsidetraining.

128 ComputeriZed Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

OVERALL EMPLOYMENT TRENDS

Production and related workers are, overall,the largest occupational group in manufactur-ing industry employment; with abtitt 14 mil-lion employees in 1980. ThiS group's share ofmanufacturing _employment has been declin-ing; _In 1980, 68.1 percent of manufacturingemployees were prOdUction and related work-ers; compared with 70.8 percent in 1977: Thisgroup constitutes the largest proportion ofworkers in all industries surveyed by BLS mits Occupational Employment Survey (OES)of manufacturing industries. According to1980 OES data, the highest absolute numbersof these workers are found in the machinerY(1.52 million), electrical and electronic equip-ment (1.25 million), and transportation equip-ment (1.19 million) industriesthe three broadindustry groups in which PA is produced andmost heavily used;

The group as a whole contains three princi-pal classes of workers, by descending order ofSkill: Craft and related workers, operatives, andlaborers. In 1980, there were 3,768;395 craftand related workers, accounting for 18;51percent of manufacturing employment. Thisgroup included 695;157 (3;4 percent of Mann=facturing employment) mechanics, repairers,and installers; 668;002 (13 _percent)- Metal:working craftworkers (exClUding inechanicS);and 1;751;529 (8;6 percent) others (e.g., Weld=ers, painters; etc.); Table 23 detail§ some of theoccupations within these_ categorieS. In addi-tion; there were 8,845,318 (43.4 per-cent) oper-atives; This group included 1;661,150 (8.2 per-cent) assemblers; 1,470,169 (7.2 percent) metal-working operatives, and 5,713,999 (28.1_per-cena other operatives. Finally,_ there were1,576,576 (7.7 percent) laborers. Some of theoccupations within these categories are listedin table 24. Note that, between 1972 and 1980,production worker employment grew slowlYacross the economy, with employment amongcraftworkers growing the most; followed bylaborer employment, and /With no growthamong operatives.

"CaroliBoyd L on, "OcCui4tional Wieners and_Logers: WhoThey Were During 1972-1980,' Monthly Labor ReVieW, June1982.

A critical question for future employmentlevels among production occupations is wheth-er and how much the total amount of domesticproduction changes; technologies that lowerlabor input for a given amount of output donot alone lower employment levels. For exam -ple, companies using more (or more expensive)equipment because of PA may find operating!for more hours in the day more profitable.Adding one or more production shifts is possi-ble if the companies can sell the extra output;it also can increase or sustain_compan3r em-ployment. On the other hand, if demand doesnot support growth in industry output, em-ployment may merely be shifted among firms.

It is important to remember that factorsother than automation are motivating declinesin production employment among metalwork-ing industries: reductions in the amount andproportion of metal used in a variety of prOd-,ucts, and increases m the use of such other ma-terials as plastics and ceramics will reduceemployment of metal-craftworkers.* However, -_where the materials shift occurs within a givenfirm, metalworking employees may move towork with other materials, keeping their jobsbut changing their labels. Recent increases inoffshore production also depressed domesticemployment in metalworking industries; par-ticularly for production and related workers.For example, U.S. auto companies have estab-lished component plants offshore; and U.S.aerospace firms have entered into coproduc-tion or other supply agreements with firms lo=cfled abroad. Increases in imports have a sim-ilar effect. Table 25 presents employment inindustries particularly affected by foreigntrade. AS noted above, the growth in foreignsourcing of parts and other products is attrib-utable in part to lower labor costs overseas,although differences in accounting make pre--cise comparisons difficult.

*Materials changes also may affect skin requirements. Forexample, leas skilled workers are needed to install plastic pip-ing than metal piping: Within the miscellaneous_plastics prod- ,

acts industry, craft and related workers comprised 16 percentof 1980 employment, while operatives comprised 56 percent.See James D. York, "-Productivity Growth in Plastics LOWerThan All Manufacturing." Monthly LaborReview, &pternbr1983.

Ch: 4-Effects Of Programmable Automation on Employment 129

Table 23.-Craftworker Employment and Selected Occupations, 1980(All manufactdrIng Industries, wage and salary workers)

Occupation Number PercentCraft and related workers 3,768,195 18.51

Construction craftWorkers 296,458 1:46Electricians . 126,001 0.62Plumbers .and plpefitters ., 61,747 0.30

Mechanics, repairers, and installers 695,157 3.41Air-conditioning, heating, and refrigeration mechanics 11,759 0.06Aircraft mechanics 19,603 0.10Automotive mechanics 51,867 0.25Data-processing machine mechanics 18,050 0.09Diesel mechanics ...............: ...................... 3,316 0.02Electrical instrument and tool repairers 2,979 0:01Electric motor repairers. , 1;578 0.01Engineering equipment mechanics 11,056 0.05Instrument repairers 22,537 0.11Knitting machine fikers 10,578 0:05Loom fixers 17,877 0:09Maintenance mechanics 209,673 1.03Maintenance repairers, general utility 181,851 0.89Millwrights 68,926 0.34Office machine and cash register servicers 1,864 0 :01Radio and telexision repairers 5 136,...___ 0.03Section repairers and setters

. _

13,553 0.07Sewing machine mechanics 12,141 0.06

Metalworking craftWorkers, except mechanics 668,002 3.28Boilermakers ................. ........ : ................ 11,966 0:06Coremakers hand,bench, and floor 9,107 0.04Forging press operators 8;727 0.04Header operators 5,385 0.03Heat treaters, annealers, and temperers 24,866 0.12Layout markers, metal 20,664 0:10Machine tool setters, metalworking 55,312 0.27Machinist's 197,849 0.97Molders; metal 38,807 0.19Patternmakers, metal 7,336 0.04Punch press setters, metal 19,141 0:09Rolling mill operators and helpers 10,708 0.05Shear and slitter setters 5,462 0.03Sheet-metal workers and tinsmiths 80,729 0.40Tool-and-die makers 158,586 0 :78

Printing trades craftworkers 357-,249 1:75Bookbinders, hand and machine 22;674 0.11Bindery machine setters

'1 6,453 0.03Compositors and typesetters 105,465 0.52Etchers and engravers 11,964 0 :06Photoengravers and lithographers 5Z601c 0:26Press and plate printers 156,242 0.77

Other craft and related workers 1,751,529 8.61Blue-collar worker superVisora 705,307 3.46Cabinetmaker:: .... 28,020 0:14Crane, derrick, and hoist operators 68,589 0:34Food shapers, hand 4,411 0.02Furniture finishers . 5,756 0.03Heavy equipment operators _17,052 0.08Inspectors 433530 2:13Jewelers and silversmiths 4,373 0:02Lens grinders 8,057 0.04Log inspectors; graders; and scalers 4,701 0.02-Logging tractor operators 13,380 0.07Lumber graders 5514 0:03Machine setterS, paper goods 9;5 0 :05Machine setters, plastic materials 7,415 0.04

142

30 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

Table 23.Craftworker Employment and Selected OCcupationS,1980(All manufacturing kid/Asides, wage and salary WerkerejContinued

Ott. iipatton Number Percent

Machine setters; woodworkingMillerS

Patternmakers, woodPatternmakers; n.e.c

5;1216;2046;7161;374

0.030.030.030.01

Shiptitters 14;389 0.07

Stationary engineers 17,684 0:09

Tailors8,107 0.04

Testers 104;745 0.51

Upholsterers20;562 0.10

Upholstery Cutters 6,802 0:03

Upholstery workers, n.e c 15,495 0.08

Veneer graders 5;055 0.02

n e c 7_Not elsewhere classified.SOURCE BOreau of Labor Statistics: -Employment hy Indusiry and Occupation: 1980 and projected 1990 Alternatives," un

Published data on wage and salary employment:

MECHANICS; REPAIRERS, AND INSTALLERS

The spread of programmable automationwill increase the proportion and the role ofmechanics; repairers and installers_(MRI) inmanufacturing betauge it will-increase ratesof installation and levels of use of equipment,and because both the risk and cost of produe=tion stoppage due to equipment Malfunctionwill grow AS production becomes morecapital=intensive. Though the reliability of individualpieces of equipment appears to be increasing,isolated problems often affect whole systemswhere equipment is integrated. As manufac-turers come to depend more on equipment,their need to be able to respond quickly to.'problems will grr Many Cases, that needwill be Met by "throwing people at the prob-lem," although the need to do so may declineas people learn ho* to develop still better sys-tems. Between 1972 and 1980, data-processingMachine repairers experienced one of the larg-est percentage employment increases amongall occupatiOna; einployment in this occupa-tion grew 89.4 percent compared to an averagerate of 19.1 percent. Note, however; that in-cliiridual MRI 6ccupations account for verysmall proportions of industry employment(under 2 percent each). Table 26 shows MRIemployment levels for 1980 across manufac=turing industries.

4

Programmable automation will also have amajor impaCt On the types of skills requiredof mechanieS, repairers, and installers; Im-provements in diagnostic technologies and thegrowing tendency to replace rather than repairelectronic -components have lowered the skillrequirements 'for many specific diagnostic orrepair tasks (less skill depth).* On the otherhand (a§ was mentioned earlier), the combiria;tion of mechanical, electrical, and electronitfeatirrea that characterizes programmableautomation makes skill breadth necessary forrepair and maintenance operations. The_ ae op=

erations are likely to ifiVolVe more,_and morevaried, tasks than are encountered in repairand maintenance of conventional equipment.In some cases; indiVidrials need broader skillsthan before because maintenance of auto-mated equipment has been added to othermaintenance work while the number ofperson-nel has been kept constant. while individualsmay need broader skills, in larger firms repairand maintenance personnel may bedeployedin teams of perbona with different or overlap-

* F o r example, DEC has been developing the "IntelligentDiagnostic Tool" to enable field service personnel_to diagnoseequipment_problems described by customers aver the phone.The IDT is based on an expert system. See-Martyn Chase,"DEC Says Artificial Intelligence Enabled It To SaVe $10 Mil-lion," American Metal Market/Metalworking News, Apr. 4,

1983.

143

Ch. 4-Effects of Programmable Automation on Employment 13

Table 24 :- Operative and Laborer Employment and Selected Occupations, 1980(All manufacturing industries, wage and salary workers)

Occupation Number Percent

OperativesAssemblers

Aircraft structure and surfaces assemblersClock and _watch_asemblers__ __..

8,845,3181561,150

25,3534,362

43.448:160.120.02

Electrical and electronic assemblers . 232,694 1.14ElectroMechanical equipment assemblers 58;174 029Instrument makers and assemblers 24;681 029Machine assemblers 101,043 0.50

_ All other assemblers.

1,214543 5,97.

Bindery operatives 77i918 0.38Laundry, drycleaning, and pressing machine operatives 57;132 028Meatcutters.and butchers 64,015 0:31Metalworking operatives ... 1,470,169 7.22

Dip_platers; nonelectrolytic _12,768 0.06Drill press and boring machine operators 124;232 0.61Eiectroplaters . 36513 0:18Furnace chargers ............. ......................... 5,520 0.03Furnace operatorsi cupola tenders 16,814 0.08Grinding and abrading machine operators, metal 128,053 0.63Heaters, metal ... ; .. 6;473 053Lathe machine oper ors, metal 155,935 0.77Machine-tool operators, combination 167,942 0.82Machine-tool operators, numerical control 52,627 0.26Machine-tool _operators; tool-room 38552 0.19Milling and planing machine operators 72561 0.35Pourers, metal .............................. ........... 15,311 0:08Power brake and bending machine operators; metal 39,877, 0.20Punch press operators, metal 182,364 0.90Welders and flamecutters 400,629 1.97All other metalworking operatives 15;198 0:07

Mine operatives, n.e.c. 9,951 0.05Packing and inspecting operatives 587,631 2.89Painters; manufactured articles 117;289 0.58

Decorators, hand 4,748 0.02Rubbers 6;363 0:03Painters, production 106,178 0.52

Sawyers . ,_ 76,728 0.38Sewers and stitchers 845,294 4.15Textile operatives 378;540 1.86Transportation equipment operatives 711;195 3:49

Industrial truck operators 269,105 1.32All _other operatives 2,788,306 13.69

Batch pignt,operators 7,369 0.04Boring machine operators, wood -4;184 0.02Coll finishers 7;422 0:04Cutters; machine .

28,048 0.14Cutters, portable machine 16,472 0.08-Cutter-flnisher operators; rubber goods _7,184 0.04Cutting machine operators, food 11;692 0:06Die cutters and clicking machine operators 19580 0:10-Filers,grinders;buffers, and chippers 115,680 0:57Furnace operators and tenders except metal 29,378 0.14.Mixing operatives 48,337 0.24Nailing machine operators 9;352 0:05Oilers .........: ......... .............................. 22,657. 0.11Photographic process workers 12,439 0.06Power screwdriver operators 8515 0.04Punch and stamping press operators; except metal 5,284 0.03Riveters ................' . . ........................... 14;161 0:07Sandblasters and shotblasters 10,440 0.05Sanders; wood 20,684 0.10

144

132 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

Table 24.=-0_perative and Laborer Employment and Selected _Occupations, 1980(All manufacturing industries, wage and salary workersjContinued

Occupation ismmber Percent

Shaper and router operators 4,655 0.02Shear and slitter Operators, metal 30,380 0.15Shoemaking machine operators 64;568 0.32Wincling_operatiyes, n.e.c 49,157 0.24WirerA, electronic 30,611 0.15

Laborers, except farm 1,576,576 7.74

Cannery WorkerS 75,068 0.37Conveyor operators and tenders 31,469 0.15Furnace operators and heater helpers 8,316 0.04

Helpers; trades 100,752 0,49Loaders, cars and trucks 5,941 0.03Loaders, tank cars and truckS 5;579 0.03Off-bearers 22,499 0.11

Riggers 18,211 0.08Setters and drawers 7,157 0.04Shakeout WOrkerS, foundry 10,580 0.05Stock handlers 104;208 0.51

Order fillers 104,208 0.51--Timbercutting-and logging workers , 36,104 0.18

Work distributors 16,895 0.08Laborers, except farm, n.e.c 1,104,071 5.42

n A.C. Not elsewhere classified.SOURCE: Bureau of Labor Statistics, "Employment by Indtistry and Odc6pation. 1980 and projected 1990 Alternatives." tint

published data on wage and salary employment. t

ping skills, although this may result fromwork rules established by labor contracts aswell as the changing demands of technology.

The potential for long-term growth in abso-lute numbers of mechanics, repairers, and in-3tallers is uncertain. Several factors will limitthat growth. Firtt, where small, stand-alonesystem are used, vendors or existing mainte-nance personnel are likely to repair the newequipment. For example, a producer of shoe=manufacturing machinery whoinStalled a3ingle welding robot in an old facility simplybrained its existing electrician to repair therobot.* Where installations involve a lot ofequipment, especially if integrated, new Main-tenance perSonnel may be added. One automo-bile manufacturer, for example, took on sev-eral new repair personnel to service an auto-mated welding system."

The fact that more hardware may be usedfor a given amount of manufacturing implies;hat more maintenance personnel will beneeded, but experience suggests that for each

*OTA site visit."OTA case study:

user there is a threshold level of new equip-ment that-must be attained before new per-sonnel are hired. That level varies substantial-ly among companies and industries. Also,automation of diagnostic and repair proce-dures reduces the amount of diagnosis and re-pair work. These developments, and relatedtrends such as growth in service hot-lines andequipment communications links, will dampenthe potential growth in maintenance perSon-nel. Finally, computerization generally carrieswith it new needs for maintenance of software,although this work has typically been done bypeople classified as "data-procedding prcfes-sionals," rather than pro:Auction workers.

One developinent in particular that maycurb employment growth for mechanics, re=pairers, and installers is equipment and Va.tem insurance. Companies may chooSe to in-sure against the loss (of equipment and/orprofit) associated with a breakdoWn as analternative to protecting against that loss byemploying a lot of machinists or repairmen.There is evidence that some cowponies havebeen mdking such a choice while using conven-tional equipment; the number of losses re-

1 4

Ch, 4-Effects of Programmable Automation On Employment 133

Table 25.-TradeSensitive Employment

Input-Output classa Industry descriptionNet trade-related job

_opportunitiesChange in net trade-related job

opportunities between 1964 and 19751964 1976,, Rita! Dirett tridirett

The 20 industries In which job opportunities were most adverselyaffected by trade between 1964 and 19751804 Apparel, purchased -41,569 -144,932 - 103,363 - 87,048 - 16,315.5903 Motor vehictes and parts 12,256 - 63;939 - 76,195 1 -54,299 - 21,8963701 Furnaces; steel products 10,055 -36,447 - 46,502 - 32,825 - 13;6773402 Nonrubber footwear -8,570 -46,315 - 37;745 - 36;790 - 9576105 Motorcycles, bicycles, and parts 7,150 =29,817 - 22,667 - 19,980 - 2,6875601 Radio and television sets -5,581 -25,986 - 20,405 - 19,098 -1,3071601 BroadWoven fabric mills - 22;688 -40,815 - 18,127 7,810 - 25,9373202 Rubber footwear -4,601 -15,292 - 10,691 - 10,377 -3143101 Petroleum refining -2,190 -12;395 - 10,205 - 9,843 - 3622307 Furniture and fixtures, n.e.c -3,101 -13,094 = 9,993 = 9,933 =665104 Office machines, n.e.c, -700 -9,235 - 8,535 - 8,329 - 2063403 Other leather products -7,337 -15,647 - 8,310 - 7,898 - 4125701 Electron tubes _ 359 -7,443 - 7,802 1;022 - 8,8241802 Knit apparel mills -3,186 -9,946 -6,760 0 - 6,7602801 Plastic materials and resins 9,923 3,531 6,392 -5,493 8994802 Textile_machinery 4,325 -1,805 - 6,130 - 5,51 -9 - 6111903 Fabricated textiles; n.ec 4,149 -1,714 - 5,863 -1;709 -4;1544701 Machine tools; metai,,oUtting types 9,388 3,558 - 5,830 - 6,161 - 331.2201 Wood household furniture -96 -5,242 -5,146 1,324 - 6,4703201 Tires and inner tubes 1,722 -3,357 - 5,079 - 3,882 1,197

The 20 industries in which job opportunities were most favorably afficted by trade between 1964 and 19756001 Aircraft 22,633 76,683 54,050 48,104 6,0366004 Aircraft equipment, n.e.c. 33;246 78,542 45;296 19;507 25;7895101 Computing machines '. , 16;183 54;666 38;483 32;544 5;9392001 Logging " "- `- 17,967 8,278 26,245 13,785 12,4604503 Oil field machine_ry , 6,410 26,915 20,505 19,313 1,1924501 Construction machinery 30,094 47,720 17,626 16,267 1,3595301 Electric measuring instruments 4;897 17;671 12;774 11 ;671 1,1032002 Sawmills and planing mills -31;566 -19,372 12,194 10;021 2;1736002 Aircraft engines and parts 15,769 26,201 10,432 3,812 6,6182402 Paper mills ............ -23,444 -13,154 10,290 9,518 7724806 Special industrial machines 11,738 21,392 9,654 9,134 5204901 Pumps and compressors 7;711 17;006 9;295 7;598 1A975304 Motors and generators ;,_ 9;244 16;473 7,229 5,267 -;9625503 Wiring devices 4,351 11,458 7,107 4,440 2,6675703 Electronic components 15,371 21,990 6,619 5,138 1,481

5702 Semiconductors _4,984 11,182 6,198 4,961 1,2372006 Veneer" and plywood -13,734 -7,669 6;065 4;806 1;2594006 Fabricated plate work 6;664 11;926 5,262 4;401 8615203 Refrigerator machines 5,932 11,120 5,188 6,154 - 9665000 Machine shop products 12,128 17,204 5,076 1,612 3,464

aThe concordance betWeen_1,0 linpUf-oUtPUt table) Clattifiedflorit and StAndard Industrial CladtlfledtIOnd is ptiblIShed In Survey of Current Business; February 1974.n.e c = Not elsewhere classifiedSOURCE. Gregory K. Schoepfle. -Imports and Domestic Employment: Identifying Affected Industries," Monthly Labor Review, August 1982.

corded by insurers that are attributed to in-adequate maintenance isgrowing. Historical-ly, U.S. casualty and property insurers haverefused to insure computers and computerizedequipment. However, Kemper has recently de-cided to cover such equipment under its boilerand machinery program, and other insurancecompanies are expected to follow suit:47 Mean-

'7Bob Nielsen, Kemper Insurance, personal communication;November 1983.

while, the American press has treated the of-fering of "robot insurance" in Japan as anoddity.

OTHER CATEGORIES

The remaining categories of production and .-related workers-metalworking and other craft-workers, operatives, and laborers-are to vary-ing degrees likely, to experience displacementdue to programmable automation; other

146

Table 26.Employment of Mechanics and Related Personnel, 1980

Metalworking Office computing Electrical ElectronicAll machinery and and accounting industrial components _and Motor_velficle_s _Aircraft

manufacturing equipment machines apparatus accessories and equipment and partsMPla and construction craftWorkers 991,615 4.9% 7,292 2.0% 19,097 4.4% 8,666 3.6% 14,976 2.7% .44497 5.8% 40,190 6.1%

Electricians .................. 126,001 0.6% 1,955 0.5% 813 0.2% I 1,451 0.6% 1,762 0.3% 9,268 1.2% 3,597 0.6%DataprocessIng machine mechanics 18,050 0.09% NA 14,296 3.32% IF-0.08% 312 0.06% ''' ' NA NA 382 0.06%Instrument repairers ............ 22,537 0.1% NA NA NA NA 172 0.07% 285 0.05% 319 0.04% 2,149 0.3%Maintenance repairers, general utility 181,851 0.9% 1,642 0.4% 1,528 0.4% 1,552 0.7% 4378 0.8% 2,122 02% 1,598 02%Electric motor repairer ....... 1,578 0.01% 1,073 a 151 a03%5%Electrical-instrument toot-repairer 2,979 0.91% 134 0.06% 1,326 0.24%

NRI metitrac tepideitt; acid lettBlers.NA Not available.NOTE: Percentages have been rounded.

SOURCE: Bureau of Labor Statistics; "Employment by Industry and Occupation; 1980 and Projected 1990;" unpublished data on wage and :salary employment:

I 48

Ch. 4Effects of Programmable Automation on Employment 135

things being equal. This group, which domi-nates manufacturing employment, numberedover 12 Million in 1980.

There are no simple nlles about how automa-tion displaces production workers; however,it is clear that as long as production volumeis constant and automation improves produc-tivity (or as long as volume grows significantlyless thari productivity), it will displace produc-tion jobs. By design, such innovations asmated controls, the use of robots and othermanipulators to load and unload machines,flexible fixtures (which are replaced or ad;justed less often than conventional ones), thelinking of automated production and materi-als handling equipment into systems, and theuse of computers to regulate the flow of ma-terials and work-in-process will: 1) reduce theamount and type of human activity requiredin any given operation; and 2) decrease thenumber of workers required to perform a givenamount of work: Robots; for example; are cur-rently not faster than people for most applica-tiOns, but they may be more consistent; per-forming with fewer en-ors over time and tak-ing less .te to achieve a given level of quality.

In practice, the potential for displacementwill vary enormously by application and facili-ty. For some applications; one "operator" maybe needed at one machine; for others; one per-son may tend several machines. In manycases; the linking of activities by automated.materials handling (robotic or other) willreditee the labor component -for setup; bothtrends will increase the machine-to-personratio.

Throughout this decade, technological lim-itations (particularly in the areas of Sensorsand interfaces) are likely to restrict the tasksin which PA may be used, and economic con-siderations will continue to moderate the rateof diffusion and the extent to which productsand processes are redesigned. Looking towardthe future, no case-by-case evaluation of oc-cupations can convey the potential for displacement implied by the integration of man-ufacturing equipment and systems because itcannot capture all of the indirect impacts onstaffing. Experience with highly integratedsystems is quite limited; and it shows that ini-tial applications using current technology re-quire more lEtbor than had been anticipated:The employment effects of highly integratedsystems are not likely to be significant untilat least the 1990's, and ctven then are likelyto remain concentrated in zhe raachineFy andtransportation equipment industries.

The problems in gauging displacement fromPA overall can be illustrated by examining thecases of welders and flamecutters, painters,and machinists. Welders and flamecuttersnumbered 400,629 (1.97 percent of manufac-turing employment) in 1980, and prWuctionpainters numbered 106,178 (0.52 percent).Table 27 shows their distribution across se-lected metalworking industries. While automa-tic welding machines have been available forsome time, interest in using robots for Weldingand spray painting was a major factor in theconmierciEdization of robot technology. A prin-cipal motivation for these robot applications,in additiOn to the prospect of lower labor costs,

Table 27.Distribution of Flamecutters, Welders, and Production PaintersIn the Metalworking Industries, 1980

Welders andflamecutters Production painters

Number Percent Number PercentAll manufacturing. ... .... ... .. 400,629 2.0% 106,178 0.5%

inery and equipmentMetalworking machinery 6,562 1.8 1 0.4Office, computing, and accounting machines 2;094 0.5 1,172 0.3Electrical Industrial apparatus 1.6 1,195 0.5Electronic components and accessories 2,405 0.4 1,229 0:2Motor vehicles and equipment 41,159 5.3 13,556 1.8Aircraft and parts 6,193 0.9 4,295 0.7NOTE: Percentages have been rounded. , /SOURCE: Bureau of labor Statistics, "Employment by Industry and Occupation; 1980 and Projected 1990," unpublished data

on wage and salary employment.

25-452 0 - 84 - 10 : QL 3-149

136 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

was the elimination of particularly unpleasantand hazardous work.

It is easier to gauge displacement potentialfor these occupations than for others becausethe source of displacement appears limited to

-a-single automation technology, robots. How-ever, all welders and production painters arenot alike. Those whose work iS most monoto-nous and unpleasant are most likely to be dis-placed, other things being equal; that categoryincludes spot welders and Spray painters in theauto industry. By contrast; it is less applicableto welders in the aircraft industry, who aremore likely to do arc welding. Although sen-sor and machine vision advances will make arcwelding increasingly susceptible to automa-tion during thiS decade,_it is not clear whetherautomated welding will ever be of sufficient-ly high quality to displace large proportionsof these workers. Also, because much arc weld-ing is not done in a mass-production context(like automotive spot welding); human per-formance may be more economical in manycases.

Even with automation of welding and paint-ing, human input is still required for setup,

-,supervision, insp-ection, adjustment, andior re-/ touching, because of the shortcomings of auto-

mated equipment. Painting is easier to auto-mate than welding because it is easier to con-trol the quality of the work. Improvement inautomated inspection systems is likely to re-duce, but not eliminate, the labor componentneeded for supervision, inspection, adjustmentand therefore retouchingby the 1990's.The Upjohn Iristitute robotics study con-cluded that 15 to 20 percent of welding jobsand 27 to 37 percent of painting jobs in the

auto industry (3 to 6 percent and 7 to 12 per-cent, respectively, for jobs in all other man-ufacturing induStries) could be displaced byrobots by 1990; Ayres and Miller estimatedthat between about 93,000 and 169,000 weld-ers and between about 35,000 and 52,000painters could eventually be displaced by ro-bots, depending on the level of sophistication."

"Hunt and Hunt, op. cit.; and Robert U. Ayres and StevenMiller, " Robotics, CAM; and Industrial Productivity," Nation-al Productiility Review; winter 1981-1982.

The displacement potential for machinistsis much less clear=cut. There were 197,849machinists (0.97 percent of manufacturing)employedin manufacturing in 1980, accordingto OES. BLS recently addressed the questionof machinist employment, drawing on CurrentPopulation Survey (CPS) as the richest dataSource for this purpose." According to theCPS, which also provides detailed data onother skilled and operative mialiiiiiedecupa-tionS, there were 567,000 machinists in 1980;there were 834,000 total skilled machine work-OM including Machinists, job and die setters,and tool and die makers.

While NC mechining can do some tasks thatare beyond the capabilities of_people workingwith conventional machine tools, a principalmotivation in the development and spread ofNC equipment has been alleged shortages ofmachinists, who are highly skilled, well-paidcraftsmen. Between 1972 and 1980, CPS dataShow that machinist employment rose by190,000, while employment in other skilledmachining occupations fell. For purposes ofcomparison with other occupational statisticspresented in this chapter, table 28 presentsmachinist employment levels in several met-alworking indtzstries according to OES data.

The proportion (and number) of skilled ma-chinists is likely to fall in_ the long term be-cause of growing use of NC technology, espe-cially amoiig smaller-firms, and because of con-straints on supply. This will happen becausein some cases NC allows leSS skilled people tosubstitute for skilled journeyman machinistsin operating andior programing machine tools.

One major response from management tothe skills shortage has been to de-skill_thework_ the journeyman once handled himself.In effect, one job is broken down into itsvari-ous elements and then distributed amongworkers who are able to learn these smallertasks."

_ _Meanwhile, entry into skilled machinist jobsis limited by the need for a lengthy skill-acquisition process (apprenticeships, for exam;

"Neal I-1. Rofienthal, "Shortages of Machinists: An Evalua-tion of the Information," MontblY Labor Review, July 1982.

"Darnel D. Cook and John S. McClanahan, "Skilled WorkerNears Extinction;" Industry Week, Aug. 29, 1977.

150

Ch. 4Effects of Programmable Automation on Employment 137

Table 28.Machinist Employment; 1980

MachinistsMachine toolsetters,

metalworking Toot _aed-die_mnkprsNumber Percent Number Percent Number Percent_

All manufacturing 197;849 1.0 55,312 0.3 158,586 0.8Metalworking machinery and equipment..... 19,181 5.2 3,112 0.8 .42,356 11.4Office, computing, and accounting machines 1,987 0.5 1,063 0.3 1,849 0.4Electrical industrial apparatus...... ........ 2,701 1.1 1,630 0.7 - 2,638 1.1Electronic components and accessories 4,108 0.7 708 0.1 _3,599 0.6Motor vehicles and accessories 2,468 0.3 9,993 1.3 11;811 1.5Aircraft and parts _7,251 1.1 4,738 0.7 6,2-14 1.0NOTE- Percentages have been rounded.SOURCE: Bureau of Labor Statistics, "Employment by industry and Occupation, 1980 and Projected 1990," unpublished data on wage and salary employment.

ple, usually -last 4 years).* Consequently, al-though the need for highly trained machinists_varies among firms andindustries, it is likely,that the overall level of metalworking skillswill drop because machinists are among themost skilled of metalworking craftsmen.

At least in the short term; however; in-creases in defense expenditures will certainlylead toshortages of machinistswhich will inturn spur the introduction of NC; A recentstudy performed by Data Resources, Inc., forthe U.S. Department of.. Defense, forecastsshortages of machinists and other metalwork-ing personnel by 1987: It concludes that de-

. fense expenditures will account for almost GOpercent of the growth in machinist demand be-tween 1981 and 1987 (compared to a defenseshare of 120 percent for assembler-demandgrowth and 87'percent of metalworking oper-ative demand growth).5' While that study doesnot appear to account for metalworking. tech-nology changes, and may therefore overstatethe potential for shortages, it underscores theimportance of production volume as a majorinfluence in employment opportunities; One

*Surveys show that industry efforts to increase machinistsupply have been limited. According_to one: "In some areas,it apparently is not a scarcity of journeymen but the price tagthey bear and industry's willingness to meet it which - effec-tively results in a skills ShOrtage." See Daniel D. Cook and JohnS. NI cClenahen. "Skilled Worker Nears Extinction." IndustlyWeek. Aug. 29, 1977, and "Attitudes Toward the SkilledTrades: Employment Issues in the Precision Metalworking In-dus try;"_report of a survey conducted for Sentry Insurance onbehalf of the Task Force on the Skilled Trades Shortage byLouis Harris and Associates, Inc., November 1982.

"Ralph M. Doggett, "Regional Forecasts of Industrial BaseNI anpower Demand, 1981 to 1987;" prepared for the Office oftheThider Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineeringby Data Resources, Inc., March 1983.

reason behind the belief in a machinist short-age is the cyclical nature of machinist demand;the unevenness in metalworking product de-mand, especially that which is associated withdefense spending, tends to place employers ina hiring position when demand surges.

Two groups of relatively low-skilled produc-tion workers; materials handlers and assem-blers; may be quite irtilfierable to displacementin the long run. Various forms of automatedmaterials handling, robots, and automated stor-age and retrieval systems (AS/RS) can substi-tute for such materials handlers as conveyoroperators; crane, derrick, and hbist operators;and industrial truck operators. Manufacturingemployment in these categdries totaled 370,000.in 1980. For example, central control comput-ers for automatic'guided vehicle system's canmonitor location, load; and obstacles, andissue commands to vehicles in response toproblems. PA can also replace people whomanually load; unload, and transfer materials.For example, in plastics processing, robotsperform such tasks as lifting; tilting, twisting,positioning; aligning; and transferring items;loading and unloading machines; and handl-ing and orienting finished parts; Materialshandling employment will also be affected byprocedtual changes; such as adoption of "just-in-time" delivery of supplies; the use of man,

..ufacturing resources planning (MRP) andother systems to rationaliie the flow and useof materials; and other measures to reduceinventories.

The biggest changes M materials handleremployment, at least in the near term; willcome in large establishments. Large films and

151

138 Computerized Manufacturing Abton MOM,: Employment; Education, and the Workplace

,Pnotc credit: Cincinnati Mi 1Eoren. ino.

Automated materials handling; storage, and retrieval;with automated guided vehicles

plants are more able and likely to installAS/RS, can most easily implement MRP, andare more likely to link automated materialshandling to production activities.* Material§handling robot applications are more Ora-Ai-calfor a wide range of firth sizes and industries,but are relatively liiin'ted at preSelit (See ch.3). Also; even where SiodUCtiOn is highly au-tomated; labor is used for the initial inputandfor final removal-of materials from the sys-tem or the transfer from one stage to another.In contemplating flexible manufacturing sys-tems, for example, it tan)* misleading to lookonly at the automated operations instead ofthe entire production piocess.

Assemblers perform tasks that range fromthe insertion of electronie components into dr-

-.*One gauge of potential changes in materials handling fes-

pecially for larger: facilities) is the experience of foodwarehousers, many of which have implemented AS/RS. For ex-ample: B. Green &Co., a Baltimore full-line food Wholesaler,hoped to triple its business by opening a new $22 million semi-automated_warehouse and consolidating activities presentlyconducted at several locationi. The company expected to layoff about 60 workers, most of them part-time See Joyce Price"60 Workers Lose Out to Automation," The News American,March 1983.

cult boards to building aircraft. In 1980, therewere 061,150 (8.16 percent of manufactur-ing) assemblers in manufacturing. Table 29shows their distribution across selected metal-working industries. The degree of complexi-ty and margin for error of specific assemblytasks govern their ease of automation. Sensorand machine vision technologies can improvethe precision and consistency of automated as-Sembly- equipment, and assembly applicationsof robots are expected to grow by the end ofthis decade. For example, the Upjohn Insti-tute estimated that robots could displace 1 to3 percent of assemblers by 1990 (including 5to 10 percent of auto-industry assembler§);Ayres and Miller estimated that robots couldultimately displace between al- ut 132,000 and396,000 assemblers, depending onitAxhnolog-ical sophistication.; hi metalworking indus-tries."

The vulnerability of assemblers to displace-ment varies substantially by product type. Forexample, with miniaturization many -elec-tronics products cannot be assembled (or in-spected) adequately by people. Also, manyelectronics products must be assembled insterile environments where managers aim tominimize a sources of contaminants, includ-ing those naturally conveyed by people. Inthese cases, special equipment, notpecessarilyprogrammable, may be designed to do assem-bly and inspection work. Improvements in

"Hunt and Hunt, op. cit.; and Ayres and Miller, op. cit.

Table 29.Employment of Assemblert In SelectedManufacturing Industries, 1980

Number Percent

All Industries . 1,661,201 1.8%All manufacturing 1 661,150 8.2Metalworking machinery and

equipment ..............: 24,779 6:7Office, computing, and accounting

machines 85,714 19.9Electrical Industrial apparatus 50,987 21.4Electronic components and

accesorles ........... 169,759 30.4Motor vehicles and equipment 175,922 22.7Aircraft-and- parts 64,126 9.8

NOTE: Percentages have been rounded.

SOURCE:Etureai Of Labor Statistics, "Employment by Industry and Occupation,1980 and Projected 1990:' unpublished data on wage and salaryemployment.

152

Ch. 4Effects of

ication: Close-up of robot arm yin printed circuit board .

ogrammable Automat Ton on Employment 139

4f4, 7-.70;.1.1

f13'11? '7'.

k

Photo credit: IBM Corp.

mall resistor pack ready for insertionet

153

140 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: &not-OM-wit, Education, and the Workplace

product deSign, often associated With theadoption of PA, Will also reduce the amountof (Or at least Simplify) assembly work neededin manufacturing. For example, GE invested$38 million_ in a highly automated dishwasherfactory and redesigned the products, reducingthe number of different parts handled from4,000 to 800."

Note Shat inspectors may be affected by 9irrl=Hai' developments as assemblers, including im-provements in sensor technology. In 1980there were 433,530 manufacturing inspectorS(2.13 pertent of manufacturing). Table 30Shows the distribution of inspectors in selectedMetalworking industries. Many observers be-lieve that the role and number of inspectorsand other quality-control personnel will dimin-ish as companies move from end-of-the-linequality-control inspection to in-line qualityassurance. This will often happen as a conse-quence or corollary of automating; At least onecompany, for example, offers statistical proc-ess-control software in conjunction with itsline of robots. General Motors; for example,expects that a combination of statistical proc-ess control; just-in-time supply scheduling,and other measures will substantially reducethe amount of receiving work in its new"Buick City" complex."

"Brute Vrerilyi---Autornated Dishwasher Plant Opens,"Amencan Metal Market/Metalworking News, May 2, 1983.

"Al Wrigley, 'GM Awards Buick City Contract to_Progres-sive,' -American Aletal/Metalworkink NeWS, Aug. 15; 1983:

Table 30. Employment of Inspector's; 1980

Number Percent

All industries : 471,984 0.5%All manufacturing 433;530 2.1

Metalworking machihei-y andequipment .................... 5,781 1.6

/office; computing, and accounting- machinery 12,991 3.0Electridal industrial apparatus 6;744 2.8Electronic components and

accessories ........... 22,072 4.0Motor vehicles and equipment 38,769 5.0A i rd raft _anti parts 28;914 4.4

NOTE' Percentages have been rounded.

SOURCE: Bureau of Labor Statistics, ,Employment bglnduslry artc10_coveallOn.980 and Projected 1990:' unpublished data on wage and salaryemploymer.:. r

Finally; some new production jObs mayemerge as an indirect result of change-sin pro-duction proCesses and/or organizational proce-dures associated with PA; For example, whenan auto manufacturer introduced a multi-robotspot-welding systerii, it began to producemajor auto-body Parts with correspondingnotches and tabs which are connected prior toautomated welding by an individual on theline; thiS new job is called "toy-tabbing." Atan aircraft niantfacttirer, the introduction ofan automated Monitoring system for an auto-mated Machine ShOp was accompanied by theintroduction of relief operators, a group of in-dividuals who substitute temporarily for full-tithe staff." In some cases, these new jobs maybe transient, reflecting the requirements of agiven level of automation, while in other casesthey may be long-term, reflecting enduringchanges in production processes_ ._ (Transientskill requirements are discussed more fully ina later section of the chapter.) In any event,these are jobs that are most likely to be filledthrough the transfer and retraining of existingpersonnel. The creation of new jobs is_perhapathe hardest employment impact to forecast.

Clerical Workers

CURRENT EMPLOYMENT TRENDS

Clerical workers in manufacturing industriesperform a variety of hinctions in both officeand plant settings. Across manufacturing in-dustries, 2,322,400 (11.5 percent) were em-ployed in clerical positions in 1980; 2,215,334(11.8 percent) were so employed in 1982, wheneconomy-wide clerical,employment was over18.7 million120 percent of total employment).Now, manufacturing technologies will affectboth office and plant clerical workers, and thegrowing use of office automation will reinforcethe displacing effects of PA in manufacturing.Table 31 shows the distribution of potential-ly vdnerable office and plant clerical occupa-tions in selected metalworking industries.

Past growth in clerical employment in manufactunng, as in the rest of the economy, hasreflected a substantial growth in company de-

"OTA case studies.

154

Table 31.-Clerical Employment, 1980

All industries

Minhotking_ ONO, computing,machinery and and accounting

All manufacturing equipment machinesElectrical industrial

apparatus

Electronic

components and Motor vehicles andaccessories equipment Aircraft and parts

Office machine operators 912,708 1.0% 147.499 0.7% 2,311 - 0:6% 6,762 1.6% 1,704 0.7% 3,302 0.6% 3,431 0.4% 6,424 1.0%Computer operators 184,245 0:2 35,945 0.2 576 0.2 3,170 0.7 NA NA 1.140 0.2 1,029 0.1 1,142 0.2Order clerks

. 242,547 0.3 65,604 0.3 927 0.3 919 0.2 1.021 0.4 1.491 0.3 734 0:1 1,281 0.2Payroll and timekeeping clerks 177,785 0.2 60,412 0.3 1,104 0,3 870 -0.2 658 0.3 1;284 0.2 1,160 0.2 -,...,1,558 0.2Personnel clerks 94,829 0.1_ 25,376 0.1 366 0.1 873 0.2 305 0.1 904 0.2 334

ow0.04 2,239 0.3

Procurement clerks 4.40,274 0.04 24,551 0.1 560 0,2 1,035 0.2 462 0.2 1,046 0.2 488 0.06 _1,882 0.3

Production clerks.. ... . . . ..... . 200,029 0.2 139,947 0.7 2,910 0.8 7,121 1.7 2.889 1.2 6,099 1.1 4,778 0.6 13;219 2,0Shipping and receiving clerkt 389318 0.4 146,036 U.7 1,908 0.5 2,118 0.5 1,409 0.6 3,550 0.5 5,246 0.; 2.579 0.4StOckroom and warehouse clerks 818,435 0.9 151,043 0.7 4,469 1.2 6.806 1.6 _2,988 1.3 4,299 0.5 5,187 0.7 10.333 1.6Allclerical 18,521,980 20.0 2 :297 :379 11:3-40:429-1079-6-9-,320 VII 28,2 -3 11.9 57-235 10.3 47,973 6.2 90,760 13.9NOTE: Percentages have been rounded.

SOURCE Bureau of Labor StatiMlcs. "Employment by Industry and:Occupation, 1980 and Projected 1990 Alternatives." unpublished data On Wage and salary employment.

15a 156

1-

142 Computerized Manufactbring Automation: Employment; Education; and the Workplace

mEmd for information collection and process-ing, growth that has been facilitated by earlyuses of computers and office automation. Notethat the continued presence of large numbersof keypunch operators attests to the slownesswith which companies make major changes indata-handling and data-processing systems,especially those that represent major invest-ments in hardware.

PROJECTED EMPLOYMENT IMPACTSProgrammable automation will affect cleri-

cal employment by computerizing the "papertrail" that follows materials and work-in-process through production. This is a directoutcome of the data-aggregating function ofPA systems, which relate all types of tasks,from design through shipment, to a manufac-turing database. Indeed, the Air Force ICAMprogram targets such functions as planning,scheduling, and other indirect or nonproductionfunctions, which underlie much productionclerk employment, as principal candidates forautomation. The development and storage ofproduct plans through computer-aided design,the direct linkage of CAD to production equip-ment, and the computerization of plannizig,ordering, purchasing, billing, and inventorycontrol will all act to reduce the demand forclerical services and personnel.

Clericalemployment is .most likely tochange, at leastin the near term, among largerfirms because they are quicker to adopt com-puterized inventory and planning systems,and because they have greater information-flow needs and problems. For example, the Lit-ton Office Product Center installed an auto-mated system for order entry, inventorychecking, receivable monitoring, and billingwhich cut time for these activities by 75 per-cent. 56 Larger firms are also more likely toadopt sophisticated automated materials han-dling systems and AS/RS, which is most eco-nomical in larger installations. Finally, reduc-tions in company work forces as well as auto=mated recordkeeping may affect personnel and

" Pair) Giffin. "Last Piece of Automation Puzzle Fits forFirm. Cornputerworld. Dec. 5. 1983.

15

payroll Clerk emploprieht. Of all occupationalgroups, .production eleik§, together with suchother intermediaries Stockcjiasprs and ex-pediters, rank among the most likely to dimin-iSh in size with extensive automation and com-puter-integration.

ManagersManagers plan, organize, direct, and control

various inn-di-Oh§ within firma They may -alsodo work similar to that of their subordinates:

CURRENT EMPLOYMENT TRENDS

In 1980, there were 1,328,160 managers andofficers across the manufacturing sector, ac-counting for 6.58_ percent of manufacturingemployment-In 1982, there were 1,260,062(6;7 percent). NatiOnally, employment of man-agerial personnel has been growing in all eco-nomic sectors, even during the recent reces-sions.*_ There were about 7.7 million managers;offiCialS, and proprietors in 1982 nationwide;Lower level managers include "nonworking"Or "blue collar" supervisors and clerical super,visors,_ who are counted with production andClerical workers, respectively; There were705,307 (3;46 percent) blue collar supervisorsand 66;841 (0.33 percent) clerical supervisorsin manufacturing in 1980; Table 32 shows thedistribution of managerial-and-supervisorypersonnel in the machinery and transportation.equipment industries;

PROJECTED EMPLOYMENT IMPACTSProgrammable automation will alter the mix

and number of managerial personnel. It willprobably support growth in upper manage-ment ranks, for three reasons, First, the M-tegration of databases and anticipated shiftsin decisionmaking toward higher staff levelswill increase the role of upper management inthe production process. The push-for so-called"top down control," facilitated by computeri-zation, inherently increases the role of upper

*There were nearly 7 percent more managers and adrninis,trators in December 1982 than in January 1980, while overallemployment fell 1 percent; however, unemployment for man-agers also grew in that period. See Karen W. Arenson. "Menke-ment's Ranks GrOW." The New York Times; Apr: 14, 1983.

Ch. 4Effects of Programmable Automation on Employment 143

Table 32.Employment of Managerial and Supervisory Personnel, 1980

Managers,officials; &proprretors

Nonworkingblue-collarsuperviso s

ClericalSupervisors

-Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent.

All iiidUStrieS 7,557,359 8:1 1;273;191 1:4 428;087 0.5All manufacturing ............. ...., 1,195,743 5.9 705,307 3.5 66,841 0.3Metalworking machinery and equipment 28,190 7.6 10,119 2.7 862 0.2Office; computing; and accounting machines 40;583 9.4 8,112 1.9 2,473 0.6Electrical industrial apparatus 12;632 5.3 8;343 3.5 1,009 0.4Electronic components and accessories 29,954 5.4 15,928 2:9 1;936 0:4Motor vehicles and equipment 25,424 3.3 30,575 4.0 1,110 0.1Aircraft and parts 48,746 7.4 24,391 3.7 1,914 0.3NOTE- Percentages have been rounded.SOURCE: Bureau of Labor Statistics. "Employment by industry and Occupation. 1980 and Projected 1990." unpublished data on wage and salary employment.

management. Second, insofar as batch produc-tion, product variation, and competition wow,more managerial input will be required forproduct planning and market analysis. Growthin PA products and markets is itself a sourceof growth in managerial employment; manywant-ads for managers refer to planned or ex-isting new ventures, and they often refer tomarketing responsibilities. Third, change inproduction technologies may create new opera-tional units within firms, and associated needsfor planning and management; Automationgenerally entails new work in database man-agement, software quality assurance; andtrainingactivities which may be undertakenby special staffs and managers;

Nevertheless, it is not clear how much newmanagerial employment the support needs ofmanufacturing automation will generate, espe-cially where companies already have data-processing staffs. Also, more advanced sys-tems that do not require mastery of speciallanguages or formats, that include applica-tions generators, or that entail distributeddata processing lower the requirement for spe-cial; in-house:personnel;

By contrast, the automation of data collec-tion and transfer activities (e.g., through mon-itoring operation and performance character-jades of machines, and developing and trans-mitting machine operating instructions fromCAD systems) is expected to lower the de-mand for lower and middle rnanagers.57 Some

"David Myers, "ACM Told OA May Squeeze Middle Mana-gers Out of Jobs." Computerworld, Oct, 31, 1983.

observers predict that this will lead to an hour-glass personnel structure among firms. Insome cases, automation may bring about anupgrading of a management position. For ex-ample, added attention to materials require-ments, production planning, and schedulingmay make certain materials and inventorymanageinent activities into "white collar"functions. Where a few employees oversee alarger amount of equipment; fewer first-linesupervisors may be needed. Indeed; with in-tegrated systems; it is likely that a hybridposition containing attributes of formerly sep-arate supervisory and subordinate operatorjobs may emerge.

Other changes in the nature of managerialwork are possible. A study evaluating pros-pects for computer operations managers gen-erally suggested growing needs for capacityplanning, performance monitoring,' technicalsupport, security management, and facilitiesmanagement.55 Also, a study of manufactur-ing firms concluded that:

The new technology substantially changedthe jobs of supervisors and middle-management, shifting the focus from watchdog anddisciplinarian to planning, training, andcommunicating.59

Industry representatives frequently point toresistance among lower and middle manage

""Higher Skills Needed: Study," Computerworld, Apr. 18.1983.

"Wickam Sidnner, "Wanted: Managers for the Factory of theFuture," The Annals of the American Academy of Political andSocial Science,.vol. 470, November 1983.

158

144 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education; and the Workplace

merit as a principal obstacle to the spread ofautomation. Greater recognition of the poten-tial of these technologies to displace such per-sonnel may add to such problems.

Sales/ServiceSales and technical service personnel consult

with potential and actual customers, conductpresentations and demonstrations, providetraining, and install products. In 1980 therewere 437,497 (2.15 percent) sales workers em-ployed in manufacturing. In 1982, there were413,85712.2 percent). These included sales rep-resentative§ or agents and sales clerks. Alsoin 1980, there were 5,165 (0.03 percent) adulteducation teachers employed in manufactur-ing industrieS. Finally, technical writers (in un-known number) comprise a related category.

Producers of PA, as well as independent con-sulting or service firms, ate likely to demon-strate a growing need for c echnical sales andservice or support "personnel to serve theirgrowing markets. On the other hand, auto-mated management and office systems arelikely to dampen demand for sales clerks.

Although industry representatives havecomplained of shortages of field-service per-sonnel and trainers, it is difficult to judge the

numbers of such people, because in many casesthey wear several hata. Also, for products thatare new and continually developing, it is to beexpected that people with relevant expertisemay be hard to find. For smaller, innovativefirms, in particular, technology sales and sup-port perSonnel tend to be engineers and otherprofeaSionals. However, want-ads suggest thateven large vendors of programmable automa-tion use engineers "applications engineers"=for marketing and pre- and post-sale supportServices. This situation reflects not only thetechnology-intensive nature of PA productsbut also the fact that experienced engineerscommonly move into sales; management, andother nonproduction positions. Such individ-uals are likely to be counted as engineers inoccupational statistics.

Want;adS suggest that PA vendors, likeother manufacturers of technical products,prefer sales representatives with technical col-lege degrees, but will consider others with rele-vant experience. Similar preferences may ex-ist for trainers. Predictably, selection criteriafor sales managers also emphasize relevant ex-perience. Relevant experience may include abackground in sales or use of computer andbusiness systems, or in manufacturing or PAsales.

Shift in Skills and Occupational Mix

As revealed by the preceding discussion ofskill requirements and occupational trends,the proportions of skills and occupations foundin manufacturing will shift substantiallycause of programmable automation. In fact,to date, this impact has been more strikingthan any change in the level of employment.While it is too soon to forecast precise numeri-cal changes, the directions of change are clear.In some cases, the effect will be to reinforcethe long-term shift toward white-collar em-ployment; in other casesnotably, the nega-tive effect on clerical opportunitiesthe long-term effect will differ from past shifts. This ,

section describes the overall pattern of changein occupational mix and discusses the incomeimplications of such change.

Shift Toward White Collar/Salaried Employment

The broadand long-term--tendencies arefor employment opportunities of:

engineers and computer scientists; tech-nicians; and mechanics, repairers, and in-stallers, on the whole, to risealthoughspecific occupations (e.g., drafters) willface diminishing opportunities;

19

Ch. 4-Effects of Programmable Automation on Employment 145

craftworkers (excluding mechanics), oper-atives, and laborers-especially theleastSkilled doing the most routine work-tofall;plant and perhaps other clerical person-nel to fall; andmanagers and technical sales and servicepersonnel to rise, although lower and mid-dle management opportunities amongusers may fall.

Thus, a shift toward nonproduction or- "white-collar" employment appears evident. Table 33lists key occupatior:, 1980 employment lev-els. and the direct ions of potential change.*

*However. changes in_the mix of occupations do not guar-antee a rise in white-collar employment in all cases.

Demonstrated Impact ofIndividual Technologies

Studies of the impacts of single automationtechnologies provide detailed evidence in sup-port of a relative shift toward white-collaremployment. For example, the Upjohn Insti-tute forecast displacement, by 1990, of100;000 to 200;000 production worker jobs dueto robots alone, compared with creation of10,000 to 20;000 jobs for maintaining robotsand under 11,000 for robot applications engi-neering. Ayres and Miller of Carnegie-MellonUniversity forecast the potential displacementof 1 million to 4 million production worker jobsby robots, over a period of at least 20 years6°

"Hunt and Hunt; op. cit.; and Robert U. Ayres and StevenM. /Adler, "Robotics and Conservation of Human Resources,"Technology in Society, vol. 9, 1982.

Table 33.-1980 Employment for All Manufacturing Industries,Selected PA-Sensitive Occupations

NumberLong:term direction

Percent of changeEligirieett

ElectricalIndustrialMechanical

Engineering and science techniciansDrafteraNC tool _programersComputer programers

Computer systems analysts

579,677173,647_71,442122;328439;852116,423

9 3714528:460242

2.850.850.350.602.160.570.050.290.21 +

Adult education teachers 5,165 0.03anagers, officials, and proprietors 1,195,743 5.87

Clerical workers_ 2;297 ;379 11.28Production clerks 139,947 0.69

Craft and related workers 3,768,395 18.51Electricians .................... 126,001 0.62Maintenance mechanics and repairers 391,524 1.92Machinists, tool and die makers 356;435 1.75

__ inspectors and testers 538,275 2.64Operatives 8;845;318 43.44

ASSehiblerS 1,661,150 8.16Metalworking operatives 1,470,169 7.22

Welders and flamecutters 400,629 1.97Production painters 106;178 0.52

Industrial truck operators 269,105 1.32Nonfarm laborers 1,576,576 7.74

Helpers, trades 100,752 0.49-Stockhandlers; order fillers 104;208 0.51Work distributors 16;895: 0.08Conveyor operators 31,469 0.15

Note: Data refer only to wage and salary workers.SOURCE: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Employment by industry and Occupation, 1980 and Projected 1990 Alternatives.- un

Published data.

160

746 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment. Education, and the Workplace

(see table 34). And a German study found thatwhen NC machine tools Were introduced; theleast skilled personnel (machine operatOrS)were most likely to be laid off, while higherskilled programers; toolsetters, and mechanicswere likely to be retained, and even morebrought into the firrn.6'

A study of the effects of advanced telephoneSwitching technologies showed that at BellCanada, despite growth in output, technologylimited growth in total man-hodes of laber peryear between 1952 and 1972 While producinglarge shifts in the ocCupatiorial mix. The per-son-hour share of the leriat skilled categnry,operators; fell by over 20 percent while theshares of plant eraftSreen and clerical person-nel each rose by around 5 percent? and the"white-Collar worker" share, least affected bytecIthology change, rose by over 9 percent. Theauthors of that study concluded that newtelecommunitations technology outweighedchange in labor costs as the cause of employ-ment shifts, having the greatest effect on em-ployment of the least skilled (and least expen-sive)_ workers.62 The pattern of large declinefor the least skilled "production" workers andsmall increases among other categories isly to occur with the introduction of prograiii:mable automation in manufacturing.

Finally, Similar trends emerge from a surveyof workers in the Japanese electrical machineindustry. It was reported that; when micro-electronics was introduced into products orproduction processes; employment of "permaznent workers" in machining, assembly, inspec:tion, and quality control was likely to fall,

"Werner Dostal and Klaus Koitner, "Changes in Employ-ment With the Use of Numerically Controlled Machine Toblg"(Mitteilungen aus der Arbeitsmarkt- and Berufsforschungl,1982.

"See Michael Denny and Melvyn Fuss, The Effects ofFac-tor Prices and Technolocal Changes on the Occuriatienal De-mand for Labor: Evidence From Canadian Telecommunica-tiona," The of Human Resources. vol. 17, No. 2, 1983.The authors note that "The force of automation can be seenfrom the fact-that_haci_technical change net ocetirred;_the de-mand for operators would have increased over the 1952.72 pe-riod by 4 percent per annum rather than declining by 3 per-cent per annum. Similarly; zero output growth would havemeant that the deCline in Operator demand would have increasedto 7 percent per annum" (p. 175).

while employment of production engineers waslikely to rise or remain constant."

Overall EffectsOccupational demand shifts stimulated by

PA reinforce a long-term growth in the pro-portion of nonproduction workers employed inManufacturing industries._ For exarnplei be-tween 1945 and 1979, the nonproduction work-er prOportion in the nonelectrical machineryindustry rose_ from 24.2 to 34;4 percent. Bycomparison, the proportion for the highlyautomated chemicals and allied products in-dustry rose from 22.5 to 42.8 Percent in thesame period. The trends within manufactur-ing are paralleled by trends vrithin the econo-my as a whole; employment in craft,; operative,and laborer positions overall is now about one-third of total emplbyment.64 The'broad occu-pational shift reflects both technology changeand the growth in nonmanufacturing employ-ment: In 1940, there were 300 manufacturingjobs per 100_ Service industry jobs; in 1980there were 113.65

Studies of the effects of microelectronics(and telecommunications) technolOgies onother economies_show similar tendencies. Forexample, an OECD study drawing on researchin several countries identified the followingbroad trendS:

within manufacturing induStrieS, a de-,dine in the proportion of productioh work='ers engaged in low-skill, rote activitiessuch as assembly;within services, a decline in the propor-tion of more routine information-handlingoccupations (a.g., low-skilled clericals);Within all sectors, a decline in the propor-tion of lower managerial and supervisoryoccupations, with remaining personnel

"Detild Boren, "Survrys on the Impacts of Micro-Electronicsand Our Policies Towirrc Technological Innovation," _paper pre-sented at the dth IMF World Conference for the Electrical andElectronics Industries Oct 3 -5, 1983

"U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Em-ployment and Earnings; May 1983; 179._

""Jobs in Nation's Service Industries Continue Rise in Reces-sion: Set NeW It&cord, Top Manufacturing Total for First Time;"News, U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor StatisticsMiddle Atlantic Region.Dec. 8, 1982.

161

Ch: 4-Effects of Programmable Automation on Employment 147

Table 34.-Carnegle-Mellon University Study Ettirnatet

Potential tor robotiiationa

Level I robot -Level II- nperntivesb Potential displacement

Range AVeragepercent_pertent

Rangepercent

Averagepercent

Sector Sector34-37 33.38

Sector 34-37I II

Sector 33-34

.... _

DTI!! preSSiboringmachitie 25.50 30 60.75 65 104,050 113,210 31,215 68,933 33,963 73,587

Filer, grinder, buffer 5-35 20 5-75 35 77,360 103,430 15,472 27,076 2,086 36,201

Gearcutting, grinding; shaping: . . 10 50 11,070 11,670 1,107 5,535 1,167 5,835

Grinding/abrading machineoperator 10-20 18 20-100 50 97,090 109,680 17,476 48,545 19,742 54,840

Lathe/turning machine operator... 10-20 18 40-60 50 130,260 141,560 23,447 65,130 25;481 70;780

Machine tool operator,combination . 10.30 15 5-60 30 142,750 154,220 21,413 42;825 23,133 46;266

Machine toot operator; NC__ ___ 10-90 20 30-90 49 41,900 45,020 8;380 20,531 9;004 22,060

Machine tool operator, toolroom 1-5 3 460 50 33,410 36,160 1,002 16,705 1;085 18;080

Machine tool operator, setter..... 10 50 47,260 51,490 4,726 23;830 _9,149 25;745

MiIling/planing machine operator . 10-20 18 40.60 50 58,900 63;230 10;602 29;4513 11;381 31,615

Sawyerl metal ............. 20 50 10;660 _15,180 Z132 5330 3;036 7,590

Subtotal; metalcuttIng machines 75,1710_ 844;850 136;972 353;690 135;227 392;599

Coil winding 15.40 24 15.50 4Q 26,57_0 33,550 6;377 10,628 8,052 13,420

Drop hammer operator 15 70 2;990 2,990 449 2,093 449 2,093

Forging press operator 15 70 6;500 7,190 975 4,550 1,079 5,033

Forging/straightening rolloperator 15 70 1,000 2,840 150 700 426 1,988

Header operator 20 70 5,080 5,080 1,016 3,556 1,016 Z556

Power brake/bending madhirie 20 170 33,240 35,240 6,648 23,268 7,004 24,514

Press operator /plate Print 20 70 4,230 4,230 846 2,961 846 -7961

Punch press operator 10-100 15 60-80 70 159,890 171,710 23,984 111,923 25,757 120,197

Punch press setter 15 70 16,080 16,840 2,412 11,256 Z526 11;788

Riveter (light) 5.100 15 10-100 30 9,090 9,090 1,364 2,727 1,364 2;727

Roll fOrming Machine 20 70 4,320 11,030 864 3,024 2206 _7,721

Shearer/slitter Operator 20 70 22,450 28,660 4,490 115,715 5,732 20,062

Subtotal; metal I armingmachines 291,440 a44,31-0-49,575_492,401 56,467 216,080

Conveyor operator/tender 10 30 18,070 20,24Li 1;807 5;421 2,024 6,072

Die casting machine operator ..Dip plater

5.1520-100

540

lo-20_50-100

1077

6,530 14;6707,780 9,500

3273,112

6535,991

7343,800

1,4677,315

Electroplater 5-40 20 5-60 _55 27;350 29;770 5,470 15,043 7,954 16,374

Plater helper 30 100 26,100 26,560 7,830 26,100 7,968 26,560

Fabricator, metal 10 30 5,910 5,910 591 1,773 591 1,773

'Fabricator, plastic 10 30 1,370 1,970 197 591 197 591

Furnace operator/cuppola tender . 20 _50 4,420 14,490 884 2,210 2,898 7,245

Heater. metal 20 100 2,070 5,010 414 2,070 1,002 3,010

Heat treater, annealer 5.50 10 5-90 46 14;770 23,440 1,477 6,794 2,344 10,782

Injection/compression moldoperator (plastic) 20 50 24,910 29,820 4,982 12455 5,966 14,915

Inspector 5-25 13 5.60 35 228,530 269,650 29,709 79,946 35,055 94,378

Laminator, preforms 20 50 10,160 10,160 2,032 5,080 Z032 5,0130

Machine operator, n.e.C.c 10.50 18 20.65 25 13,020 38,590 2,083 3,255 6,174 9,648

Molder, machine._ 20 50 5,650 18,540 1,130 -2,825 1,708 _9;270

Packager, production 1-40 16 2-70 41 55,480 75,640 8 077 22,747 12,102 30,939

Painter, production 30-100 44 50:100 66 74,380 78,540 32,727 49,091 34,558 51,836

POUrer metal 5-20 10 10-30 24 1,280 13,280 - 128 307 1,328 3,187

Sandblaster, shotbiast_er 10-100 35 10-100 35 6,290 10,030 2,202 2,202 3,511 3,511

Screwdriver operator (power) 10 50 3,420 -3,420 342 1;710 342 1;710

Tester . 1-10 8 5-30 12 51,470 62,890 4;118 6;176 5;031 7,558

Wirer._elctric 0-10 9 10-50 28 22,940 26,520 2;065 6;423 2;387 7,426

SulItotal,_miscellaneousmachines 61_-500 788,650 112;504 258;903 141;700 322;647

Joining (welding) 10-60 27 10-90 49 319;040 344;280 86;141 156,330 92,956 168,697

Assembly 3-20 10 20-50 30 1,182,650 1;318;750 118,265 354,795 131,875 395,625

Total of subtotals + joining +assembly 3,160,340 3,840,840 503,457 1,316,119 558,220 1,495,628

aTime frame Is uncertain; authors refer- to "eventUOr' ditOladtimant ontentiat,PEmpioyment flguroS_ate trann_BOotau of Labor Statistics. Occupational Employment In Manufacturing Industries (Washington, D.C.: U.S.Government Printing Of fide, 1977).

cn.e.c. Not elsewhere classified.NOTE: The italicized numbers are estimates by RODOrt U. Ayers, based on similarity.

SOURCE; The Impacts of Robotics on the Workforce and Workplace. CarnegleiMellon University, June 1981:

162

148 Computerized Manufac!uring Automation: Employment, Education; and the Workplace

more restricted to preparing and trans-mitting information to upper manage-ment;growth in the proportion of occupationsinstalling, operating; and repairing newequipment and providing related support;andsome deskilling of tasks in -some craft oc-cupatiOns due to transfer of prior operatorfunctions to machines.66

However, it is imprudent to simply takepast trends as accurate forecasts of the future.For example, there are indications that the oc-cupational shift is not inexorable; at least inthe short term. Researchers at New York Uni:versity, in the study cited at the beginning ofthis chapter; forecast the effects on labor de-mand in 1990 and 2000 of a growing use ofcomputer technology in manufacturing, office,health-service, and education settings. Theyconcluded that the overall trend toward white-collar employment woUld_continue, but thatthe shift would be greater for the slower of twoalternatiVe trends fejt the diffusion of com-puter tec hnologies.

Their analysis suggests that the large sizeof the investment in capital goods required forthe diffusion of computer-based technologiescould buoy manufacturing industry and pro-duction occupation employment throughoutthis century, While cemputeritation reducesdemand for labor overall, because of antici-pated slow growth in labor supply it can serveto avert potential shortages of certain typesOf personnel rather than create unemploy-Merit. Although, like any other modeling ex-ercise, that analysis is shaped by its underly-ing assumptions, it shows how output levelscan determine employment mix as well aslevel. Thus, output levels, economic perform-

'OECD, Information ActiVities, Electronics and Telecomrnunications Technologies, Paris, 1981. An econometric study ofthe Canadian economy described in that OECD volume sug-gested that, as capital intensity grows, complexity of opera-tioni alSo grows.- making planning and coordinationand as-sociated personnelmore necessary. It also found that as thecost of capital or equipment falls relative to other costs, demandfor "information labor" rises, while demand for "noninforma-tion labor" falls.

ance and growth can be seen to be vital to em-ployment.

PA Producer Employment MixThe emerging occupational mix found in

automation producers may indicate futuretrends for the metalworking industries gener-allyand perhaps for the rest of the manufac-turing sector as well. The Upjohn Institute,for example, suggested that two-thirds of thejobs among robot producers would be white-collar, including professionals, technicians, ad-ministrators, sales, and clerical workers.*Researchers at New York University, draw-ing on discussions with the leading robot pro-ducer (Unimation), also estimated that abouttwo-thirds of employment in the robot indus-try would be white-collar, although it had dif-ferent detailed estimates (see table 35). Final-ly, a similar appraisal was provided in recentcongressional testimony by Walt Weisel, chiefexecutive of a robot manufacturer (Prab Ro-bots) and president of the Robotic IndustriesAssociation (formerly the Robot Institute ofAmerica). Weisel forecast new jobs in sales,applications engineering, research and devel-opment, and field service among producers, aswell as new maintenance and manufacturingprocess jobs among users.** These examplesreflect the fact that prOduction work is rela-tively limitkl among producers of program-mable automation (see ch. 7); its role is alsodeclining among other manufacturers.***

The implications of the employment mixfound among producers of automatd equip-ment can be seen by contrasting the staffingprofiles of the electronic and computing machin-ery and engineering and architectural services

*That study estimated that employment by domestic robotmanufacturers was approximately 2.000 persons in 1982 andwould grow to between 9,000 and 17,000 by 1990. Hunt andHunt, op. cit.

**Testimony during hearings before the House Committeeon Small Business, Subcolornittee on General Oversight andthe Economy, May 17, 1983.

***The Upjohn Institute also estimated thatthere would beabout 8,000 to 16,000 jobs associated with supplying hardwarecomponents to robot producers by 1990. This latter estimateassumes domestic sourcing of hardware; it will overstate actu-al supplier employment potential if companies continue to ex-pand their import; of robotic hardware.

Ch. 4-Effects of Programmable Automation on Employment 149

Table 35.-Estimates of Robot Manufacturer Staffing Profiles, 1982

Occupation

Robotmanufacturing

_WO

Robotmanufacturing

Occupation (%)Now York University' Upjohn tnstitutebElectrical engineers 12.1% Engineers 23.7%Industrial engineers 2.2 Engineering technicians ................... 15.7Mechanical engineers 4.4 All other professional and technical workers . 4.2Other engineers 8.3 Manageis, officials, proprietors 6.8Computer programers 2.1 Sales workers 3.4Computer systems analysts 0.9 Clerical workers ........... ............... 13.9Other computer specialists ....... .......... 0.3 Skilled craft and related workers 8.4Personnel and labor relations workers 0.3 Semiskilled metalworking operatives 4.2Other professional, technical 8.2 Assemblers and all other operatives 19.0Managers, officials, proprietors 9.0 Service workers -Sales workers ............... ............. 4.0 Laborers ............ 0.7Stenographers, typists, secretaries 5.6 Farmers and farmworkers -Office machine operatorsOther clericalEiectricians

0.99.20.9 10,

Total 100.0

Foreman, n.e.c 0.8Machinists ............... ................ 2.3Other metalworking craftworkers 1:5Mechanics, repairers 0.8Assemblers 14.7Checkers, examiners, inspectors 2.8Packers and wrappers 0.4Painters 0.7Welders, flame cutters 0.9Other operatives 5.6Janitors and sextons 0.4Laborers 0.7

Total 100 0Columns may not add to total due to rounding.n.e.c. not elsewhere classified.

SOURCES: aVVassily Leant lef and Faye Duchin, The Impacts of Automation on Employment, 1963.2000, final report. New York University, Institute for Economic Analysis,April 1984. Data based on staffing of Unlmation. Inc. (now part of Westinghouse).bH, Allan Hunt and Timothy L. Hunt, Human Resource Implications of Robotics, The W. C. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, 1983.

industries with those of the motor vehicles andparts, metalworking machinery, and primarymetals industries (see table 36). The electronicand computing machinery industries have pri-marily employed professional and technicalworkers (39 percent) and other white-collar per-some!, as has the engineering and architecturalservices industry (69 percent professional andtechnical). By contrast; employment in theother inchistries has a more even distributionover a larger range of occupations, with rnanymore opporttmities in production jobs. For ex-ample, craft and kindred workers and opera-tives each comprise about a third of the em-ployment in metalworking machinery; theyhave comprised 20 percent and over 50 per-cent, respectively, of motor vehicle- employ-ment.

The staffing contrast is instructive, becauseemployment opportunities for producing PAwill be more like those in the computer indus-try than in conventional metalworking manu-facturing. As noted by the Upjohn Institute:

The most remarkable thing about the jobdisplacement and job creation impacts of in-dustrial robots is not that more jobs are elim-inated than created; this follows from the factthat robots are labor-saving technology de-signed to raise- productivity and lower costsof production. Rather, it is the skill-twist thatemerges so clearly when the jobs eliminatedare compared to the jobs,created . . We sub-mit that this is the true meaning of the so-called robotics revolution."

"Hunt and Hunt, op. cit., p. 172.

164

Table 36.- Industry Staffing Pattern Contrasts

Metalworkingmachinery and

equipmentMotor vehicles

and parts

Office,computing and

accountingtr ehirtery

Computer anddataprocessing

services

Engineering andarchitectural

services

Professional, technical,and related workers .... 32,617 8.6% 45,417 5.9% 139;922 32:5% 86,351 29.5% 349,063 62.7%

Managers; officials, and proprietors 28,190' 7.6 25,424 3.3 40,583 9.4 37,244 12.7 58-,947 10.6

Sales workers 7;207 1.9 3,837 0.5 4,107 1 9,965 3.4 2,345 0A

Clerical workerS 40429 10.9 47,973 6.2 . 69,320 16.1 147,665 504 85,066 15.3

Craft and related workers 99,306 26.7 161;297 20.8' 52;055 12:1 3,982 1.4 12,591 2.3

Operatives 146,706 39,5 520,413 54.3 112,377 26.1 5,242 1:8 41,557 7.5

Service workers 7,496 2 22,003 2.8 4,771 1.1 1,681 0.6 4,786 0:9

Nonfarm laborers .... . 9,544 2:6 47,433 61 7,677 1.8 672 0.2 .2,346 0.4

NOTE: Percentages nave been rounded.

SOUPCE: Bureau of Labo,'StatistJos. - rnpibj,inent by IndOntry and Occupation: 1980 and Projected 1990 Alternatives," unpublished data on wage and salary employment,

Ch. 4Effects of Programmable Automation on Emplbyment 151

The contrast in staffing patterns implies thatthere will be relatively few opportunities forpeople to move easily from other metalwork-ing manufacturing jobs into automation-pro-ducer jobs. It also implies that there may befewer opportunities for promotion frc,rn pro-duction to nonproduction work.

Intercompany PatternsWhere automation is part of brosder procc.ss

changes that also include changes in bi:Anessrelations between manufacturers a:-Iri theirsuppliers or clistriputors, occupational 1ifts

lawithin companies may mask offsetting am-plifying trends in related firms (upstream ordownstream). Computer links between facili-ties; in particular; may affect facility staffing;Eaton; for example; is implementing á-com-puter-aided design and manufacturing systemthat will share information about product de-sign, process planning; materials require-ments, and costs among computers at 290Eaton manufacturing facilities (and many sub-contractorS). Such a network Will reduce en-gineering and other perSonnel requirementsper facility."

a" As was discussed earlier, the spread of CADand its integration with CAM may alter com-panies' decisions on whether to contract outfor drafting and_ other design services. In addi,tion, the growth of automation service andconsulting firms will affect producerand_userhiring of applications engineering staffs. Whilemanufacturers have increasingly contractedout for "producer services" such as account-ing, food services, and security, programmableautomation may reinforce or counter thistrend for individual services, thereby influeno:ing staffing patterns among both manufactur-ing and service firms.

Transient Skill RequirementsOne factor that cushions employment ad-

justment in the short term but presents chal-lenges far long-term planning and adjustment

"Amencan Metal Market/Metalworking News. May 16, 1983.

25-452 0 - 84 - 11 QL 3

is the tendency of early or simpler.types of pro-grammable automation rand other computerapplications) to require work that is found tobe no longer needed with more advanced tech-nology. A classic example; in the case of com-puters; is keypunching. Keypunchers are stillin demand in the United States (fiver 57;000were employed in 1980) because many comput-e,: users cannot afford to jettison outmodeddata-entry systems whenimproved technolo-gies come along. The availability of new tech-nology thus does not guarantee an immediatedemand for new skills and staffing. However,'keypunching was the only computer field toexperience declining employment in the1970'S.

The most zibvious areas in which skill re-quirements associated with PA may be short-lived; at least in some firms; are data entry-,.data transfer; and programing: One majoraerospace user of PA; for example; anticipatesa major reduction in its use of engineering andcomputer :itipport personnel with the integra-tion of various computer-based systems.69 Asearly as 1977, NC_users responding to a sunve-y conducted by MIT researchers "reporteda desire to reduce both programing and main-tenance costs by increasing their dependenceon computer sophistication and reducing theneed for highly skilled technicians."

At present; different automation equipmentand systems have different programing anddata-processing keeds. Integration of thosesystems where applicable, developmentstandard language, and/or other developments(see ch. 3) may bring about a sharp reductionin the amount of programing that is necessary.CAD, CAE, and computer-based managementsystems typically use commercial softwarepackages and involve little programing byusers. Although data entry is necessary toestablish databases, after the initial input

"OTA case study."Robert T. Lund and Christopher J._Bunett, "Numerically

Controlled Machine Tools and Group Technology: A Study ofU.S. Experience," MIT Center for Policy Alternatives. Jan. 13,197d.

167

152 e Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

Photo credit: McDonnell Douglas Automation Co.

Graphics -based offline robot programingusing a CAD system

stage updating may be handled by profession-als using distributed, interactive systems.*

Robots are usually programed with eaay;to7-use software that generally does not requireprogffuning skills, and they have tended to bereprogramed infrequently. Moreover, directlinks between _robots and CAD or CAE sys-tems will further reduce robot programing.Similarly, NC programing is becoming sim:pier, and direct links to CAD or CAE systemswill reduce progTaming requirements. Whileusers may develop greater needs for personscapable of adapting programs, they will haveless need for program creators, although suchpersons may remain important' to suppliers ofPA equipment systems.

Transient jobs tend to persist among smallfirms longer than among larger ones, inas-much as small firma are less able to adopt

*Computer-industry repreSentatiVes see improved softwareand easier-tose systems as a response to a perceived shortageof progrruner a and other data-precessing_Rersonnel. At an April1983 colference, one software company spokesman contended,"What we need is to make microcomputors easy enough to useso that and users can control their destiny." Ste Robert Batt,"Micros Seen Holding Key to DPer Lack," Compurerwortd,Apr. 25; 1983:

newer technology. However, the developmentof cheaper, smaller, easier-to-use PA systemssuch. as those currently fueling marketgrowth for CAD and CNC, inparticularwillhasten their adoption by smaller firms duringthis decade and the next (see ch. 7).*

Qualification TrendsEvidence om the United States and other

countries suggests that, though automationis simplifying production tasks, employers areFilling better qualified, more skilled personnel.Insofar as this occurs, simple contrasts in oc-cupational employment levels will not be ac-curate indicators of changes in skill, require-ments.

Research from Japan and West Germanybrings out the contrast between employeequalifications and skill requirements:

_A Japanese survey reported that thespread of microelectronics was associatedon the one hand with subst,lntial growthin employment of high school and collegegraduates with science and engineeringmajors and on the other hand witlgrowthin the number of machine operators do-ing siniple or unskilled task."A Japanese case study of automation insoftware development found that compa-nies hired better educated staff ov timebut adopted automated technique 'aimed

*To put tie timing issue into perspective,note that most jobopenings represent the replacement of personnel; rather thanemployment growth. Replacement hiring occurs not only be-cause of deaths, retirements, and resignations, but also becausepeople move between occupations as well as jobs. Replacementneeds are one reason why BLS and others forecast that most1980's fob openings will occur In existing occupations; and thatPA will have a negligible effect on many of the occupations ex.pected to grow the most. Indeed, although 5 cempUter-relatedoccupations experienced dramatic employment growth (rang-ing from 28 percent for data-entry personnel to 477 percent forother computer specialists) between, 1972 and 1982, as a groupthey amounted for slightly more than 5 percent of overall jobgrowth in that period. See Ronald E Kutic.her, testimony beforethe House Committee on Small Business, Subcommittee onOversight and the Economy, hearings on "The Impiact of Ro-bots and Computers on the Workforce of the 1980's:" May 18,1983.

" "Ministry of Labor Re_port on Microelectronics and Its -Im-pact On Labor," cable from American Embassy (Tokyo) toU.S.Secretary of State, August 1983.

168 1

Ch. 4Effects or Programmable Automation on Employment 153

at simplifying work, allowing employeesto "supervise" automated processes.Work tasks were changed in response toshortages of experienced personnel."A ,JS Lanese survey of electrical machineryindustry workers reported that operators

Microelectronics - equipped machines inrra; chine shops (and to a lesser extent in

sembly shops) perceived a need_to un-derstand computers; programing; electric-ity, and electronics; while machine "super-vision" and monotonous routine work in-creased."A West German study of the employmenteffects of NC rnw..:r:, -,t, - eported thatworkers incrwLingt.,- perceived a need for"professional training," while their re-sponsibilities shifted from machine opera-tion to machine "supervision.""

The preference of employers to hire (or re-tain) well-educated personnel; both in theUnited States and abroad,- suggests that high-er education or skill may be regarded as an-in-dicator of other attributes such as responsibili=ty (desired because of growing investments inequipment) or an ability to solve problems andtroubleshoot (desired because of growing de-pendence on equipment and the costs of abreakdown). Thus, the Japanese survey of elec-trical machinery workers noted a need for "at-.titudes such as meticulousness and accuracy,the readiness to learn new things. and soforth" that allow prompt decisionmaking andquick responses;

In the short term, employers may continueto employ personnel who are on average moreor less skilled than necessary. This is becausemost companies are inexperienced with pro-

"Japan Labor Association, "A Special Study ConcerningTechnological Innovation and Labor-Management Relations,interim report, June 1983. Also, note that this experience issimilar to conditions observed following the introduction of NCmachine tools.

"Denlu Roren, "Surveys on the Impacts of Micro-Electronicsand Our Policies Toward Technological Innovation," paper presented at the 4th -I -M' World Conference for the Electrical andElectronics Industries, October 1983.

"Werner Dostai and Klaus Kostrier, "Changes -in Etnplo;,:,ment With the Use of Numerically Controlled Machine Tools,"(Mitteilungen aus der Arbeitsmarkt and Berufsforschung),1982.

grammable automation, especially the produc--tion-technologies,-and-are-not-y0-familiar with-their exact skill requirements and capabilities.In the long term, as experience is gained, com-panies may employ more lower skilled peopleplus a few highly skilled people working athigher levels. This may come about becausePA can lower skill requirements as well as jobnumbers at low and middle levels of organiza-tions, and because companies generally try toreduce the amount of skill they have to payfor. On the other hand, companies try to avoidwholesale replacement of skilled categories, .

since skilled workers-are generally more pro-ductive than others. The transition in skill mixis likely to be gradual, and it will vary amongfirms and industries.

Compensation PatternsOccupational shifts affect wage levels and

in turn influence the income distribution andthe buying power of consumers. The shifts dis-cussed in this chapter will alter wage patternsboth Within the _manufacturing sector and be-tween it and other sectors. While short-termtrends can be identified, long-term implica-tions are less clear; they depend on many fac-tors besides technology change.

A major implication of the shift to "white:collar" or salaried jobs, given contemporarywage patterns, is a reduction in access to well-paying jobs for individuals with a high schonleducation or less, individuals who have tradi-tionally found ready employment in the manu-facturing sector (and in production jobs in par-ticular). In many cases, manufacturing person-nel earn higher pay than their skill levels oreducational attainment would suggest, in partbecause of collective bargaining. By contrast,many low-skill service jobs pay less and offerless job security, in part because of the absence of collective bargaining. Lack of propereducation and training or employer prejudices,as well as a reduction in_available job opporrtunities, may restrict the movement of suchindividuals into higher skilled job in themanufacturing sector, while technology change.

169

54 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the WorkplatO

aid import competition may rediite the totallumber of manufacturing jobs.*

Figure 16 contrasts the earniriga diatribu-ion for agriculture and industrymid for serv-ces, in 1971 and 1981. Lower leVeIS Of COmpen-iation for the service sector as a whole reflect;he relative lack of unionization; the preva-ence of small firms; the greater role of part-Ante work, and the- predominance of women. **rable 37 shows the distiibiition of average.arnings by industrY; table 38 shows that ararage earnings in metalworking industries arehigher than those in durable manufacturingoverall; and table 39 shows earnings levels byDccupation in machine -tool industries;

As the above contrasts suggest, employeesdisplaced from manufacturing employmentmay suffer reductions in earnings, income, andjob security, if they move into newjobs in serv-ice industries or into Other jobs in manufac-turing that are not subject to collective bar-gaining. The lossee are especially likely forOlder workers; whose wages would have grownwith seniority.

Changes in job mix may affect the distribu-tion of income more than the level of incomeoverall. In very general terms, PA and otherfactors will contribute to long-terni growth inoutput and; therefore, aggregate income. Whileshifts in 'job mix may depress wage growth,returns on invested capital may grow, shiftingspending power froth workers to investors(many of whoM are workers themselves). Thisshift may be compounded inasmuch as wageearners are more likely than investors to spend

*A survey performed by Westat for OTA in August 1982showed a propensity of firmsespecially those that arerelatively large or relatively heaVy users of automation to trainprofessionals and high-skilled production tivorkers to work withautomated equipment.

**"A large Sharecif the rapidly increasing service sector em-ployment has involVed work traditionally done by women at1plw pay. and throughout the pericid (1950-81) there has beena marked tendency for much of the new White-Collar work tobe defined as women's work, paid for at relelvelylow rates andperformed by women and WAR recentlyby young workers fromthe baby-_boom generation." Thomas M. St/whack. Jr., "WorkForce Trends," The Long-Term Impiict ofTeehnology_onEm!ployment acrd Unemployment (Washington, D.C.: NationalAcademy Press; I983).

on relatively labor-intensive goods and serv-.i as some evidence suggests.*

Peat trends suggest that technologicalchange and the declinin, share of manufactur-ing jobs in the economy have eroded midleveljob and income opportunities, polarizing thework force and income distribution (see table40). Noyelle, for exarnple, argues from an anal-3ra-is of private sector earnings distributionsthat:

Medium jobs are shrinking in importanceacross the economy; in good part becauseemployers are increasingly emphasizing theconcentration of skills in a relatively narrowStratum ofrippWlevel jobs; while dealing withthe rest of their work force as a buffer thatcan be adjusted over the course of the econom-ic cycle.76

However, it is not clear that this pattern willcontinue in the long run. While long-termchanges in wage patterns and income distribu-tion are beyond the scope of this report,Several observations can be made here:.. .

Stanback and Noyelle attribute the -loss ofmidlevel jobs in xriaritifiteturing to "increasedseparation between production and adminis-trative functions . . . and the increased divi-sion of the work process within both produc-tion and corporate administration;"78 Pro-grammable automation should counteractthese trends, because it aims to integrate pro-duction and administration; AlsO, PA mayhelp to reduce employment fluettiationsamong firms in the future becanSe it simulta-neously lowers labor reciniferrierita and encour-ages_ broader job deseiiPtions, which maymake workers less "dispenSable." Moreover,as suggested by the disctiaSiOn Of Oeculiational,trends above; PA may so blur ucc...pational

*Note that between 1068 and 1982, personal consumptionexpenditures consist uk,A is grew faster _than GNP; consuMerspending is the largt:St con'r,-...,heiit of GNP. Se:, Arthur J. An-dreassen, "Economic Outlook for the 1990's: Three Scenariosfor Economic Growth," Monthly Labor Ilanow, November1983. _

_"Thierry J. N6Yelle, "People. Cities; and Servkes," The En-trepreneurial Economy, June 1984-.

"Thomas N. Stanback. Jr., and 'Iliierry J. Noyelle, atte' itTransition (Totowa; N.J.: Allanheld, Osmun & Co., 1982).

Figure 16.Sectoral Earnings Patterns

Distribution of income for full.time vorkers in Agriculture

and industry and in the service sector, 1971

Agriculture and industry sector Service sector

90 90

80 t: 80

70

50

40

; 70

.c--) 60

-0 50

; 40

0.F, 30 t. 30

0 20E 200ci

10

80

70

yl 60

50

40

3 30

Millions of persons

10

Millions of peons

Distribution of income tot tuillime workers in agriculture

and ih thistry and in The service sector, 1981

Agriculture and industry settor Service sector

-0 50

.0C 40cc

2 30,

0 20E0u 10

04

01

Millions of 'persons Millions of persons

sdpnc E John 5; Heed, "Employment and Unemployment In the Service Sector," The Long.Tetm Impact of Technology on ncpIbyncn d Unemployment (Washington, D.C,: National Academy Press ,1983).

---'",

Superimposition of income distribution.oiagricultonil

and industrial workers on income distribution of serviceworkers, 1971 _

90

7BO

74-

70

so'5

50

(;' 400

t. 30

E0 20

c

Millions of persons

Superimposition of income distribution of agriculturi

and industrial workers on income distribution of service

vlorkers, 1981 _80

; 60

C)

:500'

40

z 300

20

0 10

C

Millions of persons

H.172

.Table 37,z;EatbingS by Industry (gross hours and earnings ofproduction or nonsupervisoryworkere on Pate

payrolls by Industly dlilsion and major manufacturing group)

IndustryAverage weekly hours Average hourly earnings . I I

1979 1980 1981 1982 1979 1980 1981 1982 1979-_1980____1981

Total private 35.7 3-51 35.2 34.8 $6.16 $6.66 $ 7,25 $ 7.67 $219.91 $23510 $255:20

Mining 43,0 433 43.7 42.0 .8,49 9.17 10,04 0.83 365.0, 397.06 438.75

Construction 37,0 37,0 36.9 367 927 9.94 10,82 1.55 342.99 367.78 399.26

Manufacturing 40.2 39.7 39.8 38.9 6.70 7:27 7:99 8:50 269.34 288.62 318.00

Overtime _hours 3,3 2,8 2.8 2.3

Durable goods 40.8 40.1 40.2 39.3 7.13 7,75 8.54 9.05 290,90 31078 343:31

Ofreitime hours 3:5 2:8 2:8 2,2 -.

Lumber and wood products 39,4 38,5 383 38,0; 607 6.55 6,9-9 7.50 239.16 252.18 270.51

Furniture and fixtures 38,7 38.1 384 37.2 5,06 5.49 591. 633, 195.82 209,17 226.94

Stone;. clay; and glass

products , 415 408 40,6 40,0 6,85 7.50 8,27 8,87 284.28 306.00 335:76

Primary metal industries 41.4 401 40.5 386 898 9.71 10.81 11.34 371.77 391.78 437.81

Fabricated metal products 40,7 40,4 40.3 39.2 6;85 7;45 8:19 8:78 278,80 300,98 330.06

Machinery except electrical , 41.8 41,0 40.9 39,7 7,32 8.00 8.81 128 305:98 328.00 360.33

Electric and.electronic

'equipment 40:3 39:8 40:0 39,3 6.32 6.94 7.62 8.17 254.70 276,21 304.80

Transportation eqUnierit 41.1 40,6 40.9 40,5 8.53 9,35 10,39 1.12 350.58 379.61 424E

Instruments and related

products ..... 40.8 40.5 40.4 39.8 6,17 6,80 7,42 8.26 251:74 275.40 299.77

Miscellaneous manufacturing

industries 388 387 38.8 38.5 503 5,46 5,97 6,41 195,16 211,30 231.64

Nondurablëgoods 39.3 39,0 39.1 384 801 6.55 7,18 7.73 236.19 255.45 280.74

Overtime.hours ,, . 3.1 2.8 2.8 2.5 _

Food and kindred_products , 39.9 39,7 .393 39.4 6,27 6,85 7.44 7,89 250:17 271.95 295.37

Tobacco manufactures , 38.0 38,1 38,8 371 6,67 7.74 8,83 9;82 253,46 294.89 344:54

Textile mill productS 40.4 401 316 375 466: 5.07 5.52 5.83 18826 203.31 218.59.

Apparel and other texti'le

35.3 35.4 35.7 34,7 4.23 .4.56 497 5:18 149:32 161.42 177.43

Paper and allied products... 42.6 42.2 42.6 41,8 713 7,8' 4 8.60 9.32 303:74 330:85 365:50

Printing and publishing 37.5 371 373 37,1 6,94 7.53 8,19 8.73 260.25 279.36 305,49

Cheicals and allied products 41.9 41.5 416 409 760 8.30 9,12 9.98 318.44 344.45 379.39

Petroleum and coal products 43,8 41.8 43.2 43,9 9.36 010 11:38 2.41 .409.97 422,18 491.62

Rubber and miscellaneous

plastics products . . 40.5 40.0 40.3 39.6 5,97 6.52 7.17 7.63 241:79 260:80 288:95

Leather and leather products 36:5 36:7 36:7 35:6 422 4,56 4.99. 5.33 154.03 168.09 18113

Transportation and public utilities 39,9 396 314 390 816 8.87 9.70 0,30 325.58 351.25 382.18

.1/_il.bolesale and retail trade 32.6 32,2 32.2 31.9 5.06 548 5:92 6.22 164.96 1.76,46 190.62

Wholesale trade 3.8 8 38,5 38,5 38,4 6,39 6.96 7.56 8:06 247:93 267,90 291,06

Retail !rape ...... , 30.6 30,2 30.1 2.9.9 4.53 4,88 5.25 5.49 138.62 147:38 158:03

Finance, insuran,:e, and real estate 3E2 3E2 3E3 3E2 5,27 5.19 6,31 '6,79 190,77 209,60 22105

Services 32.7 32:6 32:6 32:6 5:36 5,85 6.41 6.90 175,27 190,71 208.97

1982

$268.92

459,23

426.45

330.65

355:06

283.48

23413

354:40

437.34

344,18

368.81

322:65

450.36

322.38

247.56

296.33

310,87

369:68

218.63

180.44

389.58

324:63

407.36

546.99

302.94

189:39

401.70

198.10

309.97

163.55

245:44

224,94

tara.,elate.fd_PlodUttionzid.relited.workersIn minIns.and manActuring; to construction workers in construction: and to nonsupervisory workers in transportation and public utilities', wholesale and

retail trade; finance, insurance, and real estate; and services. 17souRc: U.S: Department of Caber, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Empl4ment & Earnings, 1984, establishment data, annual average,

173

C)

Ch. 4-Effects of Programmable Automation on Employment 157

Table 38.-Earnings of Production Workers,Selected Industry Groups, 1936 to Date, Annual Averages

Year

Durableneeds

i. .( ..

Nonelectricalmachineryindustry

Motorvehicles &equipment

industry

Aircraftand partsindustry

Metal-working

machineryindustry

Metal-cutting

machineryindustry

Average weekly1936 $ 23.12 NA $ 30.13 NA NA $ 28.731937 26.61 NA 32.66 NA NA 32.481938 23.70 NA 30.59 NA NA 26.751939 26.19 NA 33.58 NA NA 32.341940 28.07 NA 36:69 NA NA 37.441941 33 56 NA 42.68 NA NA 44.221942 42.17 NA 54.15 NA NA 52:70

.1943 48.73 NA 59.13 NA NA 55:111944 51.38 NA 60.12 NA , NA 58:191 .t5 48.36 NA 55.28 NA . NA 57.141946 46.22 NA 52.28 NA NA 54.401947 51.76 S 57.58 58.63 $ 54.74 $ 58.69 57.871948 56.36 60.38 63.15 60.97 63.13 61.681949 57.25 60.31 67.33 63.34 ' 61.33 59.231950 62.43 62.08 74.85 68.10 71.73 69.871951 68.48 76:13 77.16 77.96 86.01 85.141952 72.63 79.55 84:87 81:27 92.20 90.241953 76.63 82.68 89:88 83:38 96.81 95.17-- --1954 76.19 81.40 91.30 84.66 93.09 89:251955 82.19 87.36 99.84 89.21 98.34 95.481956 85.28 93.06 96.82 95.57 108.96 106.251957 88.26 94.12 100.61 96.35 1 106.89 101.041958 89.27 94.33 101.24 101.25 102.00 91.201959 96.05 102.92 111.38 106.63 113.74 106.931960 .97:44 104.55 115.21 110.43 117.27 110.991961 100:35 107.42 114.65 114.68 117.04 111.921962 104:70 113:01 127.67 119.97 125.57 119.411963 108.09 116:20 132.68 122.43 128.90 124.421964 112.19 121:69 138:03 125.03

1 137.06 112.o11965 117.18 127.58 147.63 131.88 144.37 138.761966 122.09 135.34 147.23 . 143.32 i 153.72 . 150.20-1967 e 123.60 135.89 144.84 146.97 154.56 154.251968 132 07 141.88 167.66 152.04 158.70 152.651969 139.59 152.15 170.56 161.35 172.38 166.61970 143.47 154.95 170.47 168.92 174.28 166.00

1971 153.52 161.99 195.29 175.82 174.62 163.901972 167.27 179.34 219.22 193.44 198.29 194.711973 179:28 193.63 237.08 207.50 214.90 219.111974 190.48 207.6" 239:54 218.70 225.33 232.741975 205.09 219.22 262.68 246.19 ' 226.46 232.681976 225.33 236.74 305.30 263.16'- 248.69 249.9619'7 248.46 259.79 345.40 289.95, 279.72 290.181978 270.44 285.44 368.05 318.19, 308.88 322.561979 290.90 305:98 372.37 351.05 329.30 344.21198C 310.78 328.....) 394.00 389.76 346.83 366.211981 342.91 360.33 450.31 425.80 371.49 383.951982 355.67 367.49 469.80 462.38 377.94 3131183NA -Not Ayiriable

SOURCE U S Bureau tit Labor Stabslics, "Em(2l_oyment and Earnings Sfatistics, 1909.70'. (also monthly) National Machine Tool Builders' Association, 1983.198.1 EconomicHandbook of (Po Ma,:hine Tool Indttstry

158 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

Table_38.-EarnIngs of Production Workers,Selected Industry Groups, 1936 to Date, Annual Averages-Continued

Yeat

DUrablegoods

industries

Nonelectricalmachineryindustry

Motorvehicles &equipment

induqtry_

.

Aircraftand partsindustry

Metal-working

machineryindustry

M:-.1tal-

cuttingmachineryindustry

Average hourly1936 $ 0.58 NA $ 0.76 NA NA $ 0.65

1937 0.67 NA Q.88 NA NA 0.73

1938 0.68 NA 0.91 NA NA 0.74

1939 0:69 NA 0.92 NA NA 0.76

1940 0.72 NA 0.94 NA NA 0.78

1941 0.80 NA 1.04 NA NA 0.86

1942 0.94 NA 1.17 NA NA 0.99

1943 1.05 NA 1.24 NA NA 1.09

1944 1.11 NA 1.27 NA NA 1.15

1945 1.10 NA 1.27 NA NA 1.19

1946 1.14 _ NA_ _ 1.35 NA NA 1.27

1947 1.28 5 1.34 1.47 $ 1.37 $ 1.38 1.37

1948 1.40 1.46 1.61 1.49 1.49 1.47

1949 1.45 1.52 1.70 1.56 1.54 1.51

1950 1.52 1.60 1.78 1.64 1.65 1.62

1951 1.65 1.75 1.91 1.78 1.83 1.80

1952 1.75 1.95 2.05 1.89 1.97 1:92

1953 1.86 1.95 2.14 1.99 2:10 2.06

1954 1.90 2.00 2.20 2.07 2:17 2.10

1955 1.99 2.08 2:29 2.16 2.24 2.19

-1956 2.08 2.20 2:35 2.27 2.40 2.33

1957 2.19 2:29 2.46 2.35 2.48 2.40

1958 2.26 2.37 2.55 2.50 2.55 2.40

1959 2.36 2:48 2.71 2.62 2.67 2.54

1960 2.43 2.55 2.81 2.70 2.74 2.63

1961 2.49 2.62 2:86 2.77 2.80 2.71

1962 456 2.71 2.99 2.87 2.90 2:79

1963 2.63 2.78 3.10 2.95 2.97 2.88

1964 2 71 2.87 3.21 3.02 3:08 2.98

1965 2. /9 2.96 3.34 3.14 3.18 3.07

1966 2.90 3.09 3:44 3.31 3.32 3.23

1967 3.00 3.19 3:55 3.45 3.46 3.39

1969 3.19 3.37 -,A 3.89 3.62 3.64 3.55

1969 3.38 3:58 4.10 3.86 3.90 3.83

1970 3.56 3 77 4.23 4.12 4.12 4.00

1971 3 80 3.93 4.74 4.32 4.28 4:16

1972 4.05 4.27 5.11 4.65 4.59 4:56

1973 4.32 4.55 5.45 5.00 4.84 4:88

1974 4.68 4.92 5.90 5.40 5.16 5.23

1975 5.14 5.36 6.47 5:99 5.51 5.54

1976 5.55 5.76 -7.10-- 6:45 5.94 5.98

1977 6.06 6.26 7.85 6.92 6.49 6.61

1978 6.58 6.78 8:50 7.54 7.02 7.20

1979 7.13 7.32 9:06 8.26 7.57 7.77

1980 7.75 8.00 9.85 9.28 8.18 8.38

1981 8 53 8.81 11.01 10.31 8.93 9.12

'982 9,05 9.28 11.60 11.25 9.52-- 79_

NA -Noi F.vailabloSOURCE U S Bureau of Labor Statistics. "Employment and Earn lgs Statistics. 1909-70- (also monthly).National Machine Tool Builders' Association. 1983.1984 Economic

Handbook of th. Machine Tool Industry

I 76

Table ;,9.--;Averagi Hourly Earnings In the Machinery Manufacturing Industry,'

in Selected Areas by Occupation, 19475, 1978; 1981

.... .

Region and survey year

Occupation

Machine tool operators, production

Numerically

Class Ab Class BC Class Cd controlled

Baltimore, Md.

Winter 1974.75 ......... , $ 5,17 $4.50 $397 $ 5,06; January 1978 634 5.79 524 5.67

_January 1981 9.01 7,84 7.01 7.68

2, Boston, tOss

Winter 19'74.75 5.04 415 358 466January 1978 654 601 431 6.24

- January1981 0.59 8.35 5.87 8.44

3. Buffalo, N.Y.

Winter 197475 5.15 4.78 4.19 556January 1978 E77 628 544 740January 1981 8:97 8.25 7.01 9,47

4: Cnicago; 111:

Winter 1974.75 5.71 542 ; 449 5.59

January 1978 7,38 5.51 590 755_January 1981 950 800 E63 9,51

5: ClevelancObto

Wititei 1974.75 5,68 4.75 3.04 5.38

Januar 197d 7.02 641 4.12 7.17

January 1981 943 El 3 E78 9376. Denver; Colo_

Winter 1974.75 ......... 553 4.43 3.78 5.34

January 1978 650 5.36 544 5.44

January 1981 9.30 7.23 NA 8287. Detroit, Mi'

Winter N./ 647 546 402 6.29

January 'f? 8,19 7,1 I 548 7.14

Janairy . 11.61 9L3 6.21 9.44

8. Houston, Tex.

Winter 197475 ...., ...... 540 5.01 3.91 5,50

January 1978 7.15 656 4.89 7.29

January 1981 9.92 NA 5.93 10.08

9. LA Long Beach, Calif.

Winter 1974.75 5.28 4;58 360 5.43

January 1978 687 5.45 3.96 6.86

January 1981 9.38 7.39 4.83 9.20, Milwaukee, Wis.

Winter 1974.75 5.75 5.48 5..49 E48January 1978 .. ......... _778 E89 _NA 7.43January 1981 10:47 9.91 8.45 10.36

Occupation

Assemblers Inspectors

Tool room Laborers;one type

. Material Tool

matitie_ciass__ALCV-atSig Class Ab Class B handling clerks

$ 5.21e $4.86 $4.39 $ E46 NA $3,67 $4.07

6.54e 6.03 5.71 E72 NA 5.13 E38NA 840 88 8.88 $732 ; 7:21 NA

-576 4.86 , 3.97 4.97 4.32 3.66 4.526.72 6.18 4.89 NA 0 5.26 4,55 5.73NA 8.31 6.62 8.47 7.44 618 7:22

543 5,29 473 5,54 5.04 4,36 4.43

6,80 6.92 6.43 7.20 6,36 NA 5,86

734 9.24 8.07 9.35 7.62 8.11 7.80

6.20 5.35 458 551 5.15 4.30 458836 6.84 5.49 743 6.80 5,85 E47

11.31 8.95 7.43 925 8.56 '6.81 9.10

5.80 5.57 4,95 550 5,264"- 4,49 4.96

7.09 7,21 6.13 720 6.65 / 5.07 6.50

956 9.64 7.80 9.93----. 8.86

5.134° 4,90 3,01 5.14 4-.03 , 358 4.38

_653 5.94 430 6.67 5.93 4.75 5.89

1069 7.'1'9 5.:1,0 8,55 7.04. 559 7.54

6.68 6.15 5.60 E74 555 4.79 5448,94 _7.80 [\ 7.23 _7.79 E50 614 7.13

1208, 11.17 ,9.59 11.01 NA 9.45 9,80

5.31 5.27 4.47 5.43 4,66 4.21 4.65.7.26 6,89 5.86 _7.37 6.43 5.38 53619,08 9.75 9.05. 10:07 8.45 7.41 7.80

5.17 4,71 3.88 5.38 4.30 3.82 4.587.44 6,29 4.41 6.47 5.50 4.67 5.24

9.87 8.02 6.09 9.77 7.20 5:74 6:93;

589 5.68 5.24 5,64 5.40 NA 4.77

7513 7,72 6,96 7.24 6,97 6.19 5,28

11.35 10,31 9.09 9.99 NA 8:88 9:13

Table 39.-Average Hourly Earnings in th_e_Machineq_ Manufacturing Industry,ain Selected Areas by Occupation, 1974.75, 1978, 1981-Continued

rygion and survey year

_0_c_c_u_pation Occupation_ASSdrnblers Inspectors

Laborers,materialhandling

ToolclerksClass Ah Class BC Class CI

Numericallycontrolled

Tool roomone typemachine Class At Class B9 Class Ah Class BI

Newark,_Newark, N.J. -Winter 1974-75 5.31 5.31_ 3.86 5.61 5.71 5.28 4.21 487 4.92 4.02 4.85January 1978 6:50 6:59 4.85 6:29 7,47 6.54 5.71. 5.95 6.61 4.96 5.74January 1981 9.44 9.04 6.35 7.68 NA 7:93 5:90 7:83 7:77 7:21 &60Pittsburgh, Pa.Winter 1974-75 5.55 5.36 4.97 E19 5.43 5.80 4.4 6.19 4.99 4.47 4.65January 1978 7.15 6.71 6.15 E69 7,21e 7.14 6.02 7.37 6.66 5.33 6.18 'January 1981 9.44 8:80 8:14 9:33 NA 8:52 7:78 ' 9.44 8.79 8.74 7.48St. Louis, Mo.ftl.Winter 1974-75 6.54 5.07 4.69 6.33 5.76 5.78 4.70 6.23 5.03 4.17 4.62January 1978 8.25 6.14 6.12 7.26 8.03 6.91 5.81 7.24 6.23 5.11 5.81

Jan_uary 1981 .. 45 836 8-30 _27 8.69 9.10 7.57 9.04 8.35 6.79 7.86

Vot Availableielectrical Machinery (SIC 351. .

.tatorS who set up their Own machines and perform a variety of machine operations to close tolerances using decisions based on blueprints and layouts.?NOM wet set up their own machines and maintain operation setuips made by others.?relOrS who petform routine and repetitive operations but do not set up machines,re than nee- type 01. machine

and adiusts parts and makes decisions regarding proper performance of component or unit,tembles parts in accordance with standar,' and prescribed procedures. Requires some fitting and adjusting.ponsible for decision, regarding quatity of product and operations.- Troubleshooting and _interpreting of drav,..,, and Specifications is involved.fs produelS and recterses having rigid specilicutionS with established inspection procedures.

'ROE Data from U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, compiled In National Machine Tool Builders Association, 79634984 Economic Handbook of the Machine Tool Industry.

v

178

Ch. 4Effects of Programmable Automation on Employment 181

Table 40.Distribution of Total ILS Labor Force Among Earnings_Classes; 1960 and 1975; andDistribution of 1960.75 Job Iiicreases in the Services

Distribution of total LIS:labor force(geed-Olt-age:S)a

Earnings cid ,se'1.60 and abc:iu1.59 to 1.201.19 to 0.800.79 to 0.400 39 and below

1960

10.9 (20.7 f35.924.1_8.I$.:4 f

31.6

32:5

Total 100:0

1975

12:0 134.2

1;947 _9:5 )22.222.2 5,224 25.527.8 2,311 11.328.4 1

38.09,205 44.9

53:89:6 1;829 8:9

100:0 20;516 10570

1960-1975 job increasesin ServiceSb

Numbers of_jobs (1,0011) Percentage

dEnclurics_agrculture, mining, and public administration.bTransbortation and other utilities. wholesale, retail, finance, insurance, real estate, corporate services, consumer services, and nonprofit.',Relative to 1 0, for average earnings

SOURCE Tinirras M Stanback, Jr 'Work Force TrendS," The LongTerm Impact of Technology on Employment and Unemployment (Washington: D.0Pro:, 19831

distinctions (e.g., between engineer and tech-nician in some cases) as to raise questionsabout equal pay for equal work, potentiallymotivating a compression of the pay scale.

Finally, the factors that shaped past pat-terns of service sector employment and com-pensation, such as an accelerating influx ofwomen into the labor force, Will not be the onesto shape future traits, especially if capital in-tensity and productivity grow a the servicesector as expected (due to computerization andother factors) and as slower growth in the la-bor force makes labor scarcer (see below).

Nevertheless, the tecluiologies may alsoallow a continuing polarization of the workforce in at least some instances. For example,a recent study of software production foundthat individual workers arr: assigned smallpieces_ of a large: task, which in turn is partof still larger tasks.

National Academy

The elaborate division of labor energy insoftware work is sometimes and mistaken-lycalled specialization; It is more accurate-ly called fragmentation. Increasingly, soft-ware work is characterized by a stratificationof responsibility and pay, not just a divisionof labor. What is unclear is whether there isa direct path between low-paying and highpaying positions."A common response, especially from the

labor movement, to the prospect of a worsen-ing income distribution (or erosion of earningpower) due to changing job opportunities is topropose that work hours be reduced.78 AsWassily Leontief has noted;

"Philip Kraft and Steven Dubnoff, "Software Workers Sur-vey.!' Computer World depth), Nov 14, 1983:

"See, forexample: AFL-CIO. "The Future of Work." mimeo1983.

162 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

The reduction of the average work week inmanufacturing from 67 hours in 1870 to some-what less than 42 hours must also be recog=nized as the withdrawal of many millions ofworking hours from the labor market; Since '

the end of World War II; however; the workweek has remained almost constant."

Moreover, jobs in manufacturing, especiallyamong metalworking indUstrie§, typitally in-clude overtime hours of work (and correspond-ing extra pay). The United Autombbile Work-ers Union has begun to preSS for reductionsin overtime work as a meanS increasingauto-industry employthent. Its wadership haslinked the issues of work hours, job security;and acceptance of technological change.8°While reducing work hours can increase thenumber of jobholders, it may not be possibleto employ more people without reducing real(i.e., adjusted for inflation) per-person wages.For this reason, job-sharing programs under-taken in Europe and in this country; includingreductions in hours of work; have tended tobe temporary.

Automation may allow real wages to in-crease only under certain circumstances, andwhere they do increase they may not increaseenough (see fig. 17).* Increases in nominal as

ThWassily W. Leontief; "The Distribution of Work.and In.

`come," Scientifit American; September 1982. The average ofweekly hours in manufaCtiiring during 1982 was 38.9 (downfrom 40.2 in 1979), compared to 35.1 (down from 35.1 in 1979)for the total private nonfarm economy. See Valerie A. Personick,"The Job Outlook Through 1995; Industry Output and Em-ployment Projettions," Monthly Labor Review,_ Novembc-,71983; and U.S. Department of Labor; Bureau of Labor Statis-tics, Employment and Earningi, May 1983.

_'"'"_Overtirne, Technology, '84, Issues" utomobve News, Dec.

19, 1983.*Note that Leontief has argued tr. wages are not like-

ly to rise sufficiently Co allow voluntary reductions in the workweek, given antkipated technological displacement; Leontiefadvocates government intervention via income maintenance andincome distribution programs. See Wassily N. Leontif, "TheDistribution of Work and Income," op. cit.

well as real wages will be constrained by in-creasing international competition. (Note thatmanufacturing workers in Hong Kong, as inother developing regions, work 6 days a week,10hours a day, have few holidaya a year andearn relatively low wages. Their lower stand-ard of living constrains us from raising ourswhere our products compete in the same mar-ket.) General Motor% for example, hasattempted to increase its ability to competewith producer8 operating in low-wage_coun-tries by introducing a dual pay system whichprovideS lower wages for new workers, con-fronting existing personnel with "an agoniz-ing choice between going againSt deeply heldunion principles and giving some of theirneighbors a chance for a job."8' Several othercompanies have also moved to adopt dual paySystems, but such systems are consideredcontroversia1.820ther mechanisms for sharingwork, such as early-rethement (which sharesjobs between generations rather th an amongcontemporaries); may more easily preservewage levels, although they may draw on asmaller pool of workers.

Profit-sharing inik;,7 provide a means bywhich employees gain job security in exchangefor variable comper,Sation. Interest in profit-sharing has been growing recently. Bothheightened international competition andgreater capital intensity due to PA use mayStimulate manufacturers' interest in p;.ofit-sharing.

"John Holusha, "G.M. Division Votes on Two-Level Pay,"TheNew York Times, Aug. 24, 1983.

"Steven Flait_;Pev Cuts Before the Job Even Starts," For-tune, Jan. 9, 1984.

Contextual FactorsThere are many ways for companies to ad-

just to changing labor needs. Employers canlower their use of labor without layoffs or

other involuntary separations of employeesif:1) the tiering of displacement is priced accord-ing to the normal i,:arntiver or attrition rate of

180

Type oftechnology

change

Capital saving_or. neutral

Ch. 4Effects of Programmable Automation on Employment 163

Figure 17.Technology Change and

Change In amount oflabor used v. Change

only in type oflabor used

Output

Laborhoiii rises

Real Wages

Nomlnal Output price Realwagewage change change change

:%tput pricefalls Real wage

Nominal risewage rises

Nominal wageconstant

Output priceconstant Real wage

rise

Output pricefalls Real wage

rise

Output priceconstant Real wage

constant

Deskill

_

Labor --hour rises_

Capital using

Deskill

Capitalrises

OutOut

Real wagenot rise

. Technology not adopted(at old wages, prices and costs)

L JCIffalls

Output Output_ price fallsand/or constant Real wageNominal

rise,wage riseS-

Capitalrises <

Output

Labor

Output

Output pricerises

Real wage fallor constant

Output pricefails

Nominai Outpu) pr;crwage constant constant

KFY = Reduce

OTE There is no straightl-rward economic analysis of effect of ch-ange in skill mix as there is for change in 'abor productivity. per se

SOURCE: OTA, based nn at alysis by Eileen Appelbaum, Temple iiyersity.

181

Reai wagprise

Rat.1 wc_gccop Cant

Realnot rise

164 Computerized ManulactuiMO Automation: Employment, Educatiori, and the Workplace

the firm (which reflects resignations; perma-nent disability departures; deaths; retire-ments; entry into extended military service,disciplinary discharges, and transfers) ; ') cur=rent employees who wish to remain with thefirm can do new work or jobs (on their ow ;n orwith training); and/or 3) the level of output ex-pands to at least accommodate the existinglabor force, despite growth in output peremployee.

AT&T; for example, increased automationwithout major laytiffs during the 1950's and1960's because of expanding output it now _a.p=pears to have leaa capacity for maintainingen.Tloyment leVels. General Electric, for ex-ample; is spending $100 million to modernizerefrigerator production arid expects t,o elm=inate 1,000 jobs from that operation by themid-1980'a. However; it does not plan to layOff personnel because about 300 employees

leave voluntarily each year; arid the companyplans to reassign perssonnel to other appliance-manufacturing jobs," 84 Similarly, Westing-

house has a policy of not_ laying off personnelbecause of technology change.

This section examines relevant changes inthe labor supply that may complement the ef-fects of technology irrd demand changes on

patterns, and it examines Japanese ap-proaches to work forCe ad;trat, nent. Chapter6 discus;:cs retraining Ind ,iriSeling pro-grams to ease transitions of current em-ployees.

Labor Supply

The makeup of the populatidfi and the laborforde are important factors for evaluating theoverall challenge of adjusting_te changing jobOpportunities. The size; growth, and age struc-ture of the labor force are relevant, as is corn-

"Bruce Vernyi. "GE Investing $100N1 in Refrigerator Line,"Amen( Metal_ A,:ar:,ei,Metalworking News, July 25,_ -198?:

4 :;et? "GE to Improve Businesses for $590 Million,The WWI reet Jorurn-al Nei: 2 1983. A $369 million re 4.-

nient by GE in pl nt and equipment for an-ers.t. engines andcontrols 1.011 affectj1.215 employees in two cities. GE plans toreassign many workers. provide specid educatio:. ;ma -'training assist:- v.v." and sponsor placemetir programs for pt_r2on-nel c:ioosim: to leave.

position by 1-L;:e and sex. OTA expects thatsome of the labor supply trends discussed be-low will help to offset the potential negativeeffects of PA on employment levels:

The total U.S. population is growing rela-tively slowly; the Census Bureau predicta thatthe pcipirlation will reach its maximum size(308.9 million) in the year 2050. Growth in thelabor fOroe, which includes principally pe.:splebetween the ages of 16 and 65, peaked chiringthe late 1970's following the inflUX of the baby-boom generation and rapid grOwth in laborforce activity among women. The me,dian ageof the population has risen to over 30; and theproportion of the population Under 25 is declin-ing (it is now about 41 percent, down from 46percent in 1970).85 The number of per sons aged26 to 2 j will also decline through this century.The median age of the labor force is almost 35,and the number and on:portion of workeraaged 16 to 24 -==the new entrant groupWillfall. Conae-quemly, the labor forcr is expectedto groW relative?;- slowl7 in this and futuredecades (see tables 41 and 42).

Slower growth in the labor force mxkes theczonomy better able to absorb increases in out-put per worker without growth in unemploy=ment. Indeed, for output to grow relative tothe labor fOrce; increases in output per woi-k6rwould be. ne4:essary; without them co,npanies

ould eicOi-Tience labor shortages. On theother hand, if output does not groW factenough relative to the labor force, lat.

surplues may arise: Labor surpluses may .-)erealized as unemployment, withdriwalthe labor force; or involuntary pan timeemployment and other forms of underem; ,-)y-rnent. Official unemployment statistics meas-ure only part of the problenn.

The aging of populations and labor forcesinfluenees who can and will bear the burden

adjusting to changing labor requirements.Other things being equal, the greater the pm-portion of older workers; the faster will attri-

""U.S. Population Seen I-Ptting real( in 20 of 308.9 Mil.

lien," Th Wall Street Journai, N....1 9; 1982; P Id H. N. Fuller-

ton. Jr ; and Tschetter, The 1995 Lebo[ Force: A Second

Look, Aloriti4v Lhhar Review. November 1983.

Ch. 4-Effects of Programmable Automation on. ErrolOyment if

Table 41.--U.S. Population by Age Groups; 1929.83 (thousands of persons)

July 1

1929

1933

1939

1940 .1941194219431944

19451946194719481949

19501951195219531954

19551956195719591959

19631961196219631964

19651966156719681969

:97019/11972

19i4

1975197619771978

198019811902.1983.

Total

121,767

{ 125,579

130.880

132.122132 402134:860136.739138:397

139:928141.389144;126146,631149,188

152.271154.878157.553160.184163.026

165.931168,903171.984174.082177.830

180,671183,691186.538189.242191,889

194.303196,560198.712200.706202,67%

205.052207.661209.896211.909213.854

215 973218.035220.239222.585225.055

227.704229:849232.057234.249

Under 5 5-15

11{734

10{612

loA18

1,3,57910.85011.30112.01612.524

12:97913.24414.40614.91915.607

16.41017.33317.31217,63818.057

18.56619.00319.49419,88723.175

20.34120,52220.46920.34220.165

1.12419,20818.S6317,91317.376

17;16617,24417.10116.85116,487

16.12115.63715,56415.73516,063

16,45716,94317.372

26,800

26,897

25.179

24,81124.51624.23124.09323,949

23.90724,10324.46825.20925,852

26.72127.27928.89430.22731:480

32,68233.99435 :27236,44537,368

38,49439,76541.20541.62642.297

44.2e

44,84::

".641.914{1,20343,58242,989

42.50842,09941.29840,42839,552

38.82038.04637.620

16-19 20-24

9.127

9.302

9.822

9.8959.8409,2309.60?9.561

9.3619.1199.0978,9528,788

8,5428.4468,4148.4608.637

8.7448.9169.1959.543

10,215

10.63311,02511,18012.00712,736

13.51614.31114.20014.45214.800

15.28915.68816,03916.44616.709

17,01717.19417.27617,28817,242

17.13616.68216.205

Age iyears 1

10,694 35,062

11.152 37.319

11.519

11.69011,80711,95512.96412,062

12.03612.00411.81411.79411,700

11.68011.55211.35011.06210.832

10.71410.61610.60310.75610.969

11,13411,48311,95912.71413:269

1334614.05015.24815,78616,480

17.20218.15918.15318,52118.975

19.52719,98620.4992n 94621.257

21.61221,94621.935

25-4i

39,354 25.821

39,86840,38340,86141.42042.016

42.52143.02743.65744,28844.916

45.67246.10346,49546,78647,001

47,19447,37947,44047,33747.192

47:14047,08447,01316.99446.958

46.91247,00147,19447.7,n48.064

48.47348,93650.48231.74953.051

54.30255.85257,56159,01061.379

63.47465.49967.625

.'.076

2,933

26.24926.71827.19627.67128.138

28,63029.06429.49829.93130,405

30.84931.36231.80432.39432,942

33.50634,05734.59135.10935,563

36:20336.72237.25537.78238.238

38,91639.53440,19340,84641,437

41.99942,48242.89843,23543,522

43.80144,00844.15044.28644.393

44,49399,47644,474

55_andove

6,474

7,363

8,764

9.0319.2889.5849,867

10,147

10.49410,82811.18511.53811.921

12.39712,80313,20313,61714,076

'1.525.4.93815.38815.80616.248

16,67517.08917.45717.77818.127

18:45118,75519.07119.36519.680

20{10720.56121:02021,52522.061

22.69623,27823.39224.50225.134

25,71426.26026,824

Note -,'..{{.{3es Armed Forces overseas beginning 1940 Includes Alaska and Hawaii beginning 1950

SOURCE. Deoartment of Commerce, Bureau of Census.

tion thi _.,gh retirement (normal or early)reduce the population at risk of (1:::-2olacement;However; involuntary redid:a( rlj, is tanta-mount to layoff; and it may l r- source ofeffective unemployment:

For those elgiblb for pensions or socialsecurity, labor force withdrawal is a more vi-al)? alternative to a prolonged job search thanit is fdr 3 n.ing:_r persons, who are leSS likelyto have alternative sources Jf income."

"Philip L. Rones, "LabOr Market ProblPrns of Older Work-ers.' Monthly Lebo, Review, Mey 1983.

BLS has fore( It that the proportion of em-ployees aged 55 and older will ha: th91980'sand 1990's; in part because of anticipated de-clines in labor roc participation:" nt thesame time; thero wir, be growth in the shareof 25- to 54-year einployees; the prime agegroup: Change in the age mix- (and other dem-ographic phenomena; SiiCii_as labor force par-ticipation rates); will alS6 lead to chaiiges in

"H 7. Fullerton, Jr., and J. 'Tschetter, "The 1095 Labor7orce: A & :mil Look," Monthly Labor Reviet November1983.

1

166 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

Table 42.-U.S. Population and Labor Force; 1929.83 (monthly data seasonallyadjusted; except as noted)

Period

_Covildrinorunsti11-1igigplc'.).

"arred

forces

1.aporforce

inclurling

-de-ArmedForces

Chnhan laser force - Unem Cook.meet rate

Labor forceparticipation

EroMOY.men;

'including Icsdent

Forces

I

Total

Employment

0nerriPtcy.meat

Allwork.ers '

i.,.,''''''

Agri.'cultural

I

Nonage. ,

cultural 1

Cnoltan I

ers I

1 e,i a,n

19297

Thousands of Peftont 14 years of age and over Percent

4 9,180 47--ts30; 10:450 i 31-).Gi 1.550. ___ __

1933 ....I ......... . 51590I

38,7601

10090 28:6101

I

1939 , 55.230 1 45.750 1 9,610 36:1401

1940 99.840 ; 55 640 1 47 530 [ 1,5401 37.960

1941 99.900 ! ...... 55.910 50.3501 9.100 I 41.2501

1947 98:640 r .- 56.410 53,7501 9,2501 44.5001

1°13 94,6401 44 55.540 54,9701 9-080 1 45.3301

93.2201 ... ....... .. ..... .... 54.630 53.9601 8,9541 45,0101

I.1 :. -1

1945 94.030! 53.860 ,28291 8.5601 1.2401

111m5 103.0 n) 1 57.520 55 250 1 0.320 I . 930 1

194/ 106 J.,18 i 10'0.168 57 :812! 8,2561 ':,5571

Thousands of persons 16 yeaTS of age and over

3.21

12.830 I 24 31

9,9801. ' 21

8,120 .

5.560 . .....7.660 ; 71,070 ..3

6701 1 2 j

1,0402:2702.356

1947 101.627 11 59 350 57,0381 7,890 I

1998.. 103.064 1 I 60.621 58,343 I 1:679

1949. 103.9941 ... ...... ... 61.286 57,6511 7,658! . _

1950 ..... 104.995 ; 1,159 1 63.377 60,087 62 208 55.9181 7,1601

1951 104:6211 2.143 I 64,160 62,104 1 62.017 59.9611 6,720

1952 .. 105131 i 7.285 1 64.54 62,636E 62.138 60.250 I 5,500

1953' 107:056 i 2:2311 65246 63.410 63.015 61.1791 6,260

1954 ,. .. 103.3211 2.142165,7115 62,251 63,643 60,109 6:205

1955 . 109683 ; 2.064' 67.087 64,234 1 65.023 82.170 6450 55:722 ;

1955 110.954 1 1.9E51 68.517 65:764 1 66:552 63,799 I 6,2831 57,514 1

1957 117.2651 1,9481 68.877 I 66.019 1 66,929 64.071 I 5,947 58:1231

1958 . 113.7271 1.8411 69,986 64.883 I 67:639 63:035 1 5,586 57,450 1

1959.. 115;3291 1 :7881 70.157 66,4181 63.369 64.6301 5,565 59,0651

!

1960. 1 117.245 i 1;8611 72 489 67,6391 39.628 65.778 3,458 60,3181

1961 .. 118.771 ' 1.900 ; 111,159 67,646 i 70,959 651461 5:200 60646 i

1952' 120,152 I 2,061 1 72,675 68:763 j 70.614 66.7021 4,944 61,759 !

1953... 122.4161 2.0061 72.639 69.768 1 77.833 67,7621 4:687 63.016

1964 124.4051 2.0181 75,109 71:323 1 73:091 69,3051 4,523 1 59.7621.

I

1

1965 . 126.513 1946 i is.41.11 73034 1 74 .i: :, 4.0881 4,361 66,7261

1966 . . 128.05E 1 2:122' 77,892 75,0171 73./70 72,8951 3,979. 68.9151

1967.. I 179.87' 1 2.7181 79.565 76.590 77,347 74:3721 2849 70.5271

1958 132.028 / 2.2531 80:990 78.172 78.737 75,9201 3,817 72,103 1

1959 ...... ;34,3351 2.228 82.9721 80.140 1 80./24 77,902 1 3:606 74 :2^_61I-- I1970 137.0851 2.1181 84.889 80,196 82.771 78-678 1 3,463 15:215 :

197-i -. ...... . 140.2161 1.973 86.355 81:340 84.382 77,3671 3,394 75,9721

1972. 144.126! 1.8131 88.847 83,966, 87.034 82.153! 3,484 78:669'

1973' i 147,096 : 1,774 91.203 86.838 89:429 85:064' 3,470 81.594

1974 ::11 150:1201 1:721 1 93,670 i 88,515 91.949 86,794 3,515 83,2791

1975 :537531 1;6781 95453 87,524 93.775 85,846 3,405 82,438

1976.. I 156.1501 1.6681-97.826 90.420 96.158 88.752 3.331 85,421 I

1977 159.033: 1:6561100 :665 90 573 99,409 52.017 3,283 88.734 i

1978' 161.9101 1.631103.862' -97.679 102.251 96.048 3.3871 °2;6611

1979 I 164.8631 1.597 106,559 1 1C 421 174:962 98.824 3,347 I 95.477 I

1980 ..... 167.7451 1,6041108.544 11 IC, 106:940 .99.303 3,364 95,938 I

1931 170 :1301 1.8.45 110,315 102, 42 108.6/0 100.397 ! 3,368 97 030 1

1902 ,.... 172,271 ! 1.6381111.872 101.194 710209 -.99:526 ; 3 431 91.125 ,

1983 174215; 1:676 ;113;226 102.510 .111.5501100.034 1 1,383 97.450 1

46,1481 2.311 ... .50./14 I 2.276 ..

49,993 ! 3.637 ;

5175° I .1.7-t: I 5.2521,5 I ,055;! 32ia /Al 09311 2.9

:,91?' 1.1331 2.863.3`11 2.512

11

9.

2.852117,781 ,.2,8591;

1.93.913.91

55.756 057 258.758:6

57:255.856.8

3.91 58.33.8 58.85.9 I 58 9

3 1 59 7 53.23.31 60 1 59.33.01 60 0 59 02 9 ' 597 589

59 6 58.8

4.3 4d( 59.34 0 9:11 60171 60.04.2! 4 31 603 ' 59.6

4,602'. 6.61 6.01 MI I 59.5

3.7401: 5.3 I 5.51 59.91 59.3

11 1

3,8521' 5.9 5.5 1 60.0 I 59.4

4,7141 6.5 6 7 1 60.0 I 59.3

3,911 , 5:4 5:5 , 5 2 58.8

4.0701, 55 5.7! 59.31 58,7

3.786 ,I 5 0 5.2 1 59:41 58.7

3.360 4.4 4.d 59.51 58.9

28751! 3.7 3.8 ! 59.81 59.2

2.975 t' 3.71 3.8 I 60.21 59.52,14;.211 3.5 3.61 60.31 59 6

3,4321' 34 3.5 60 8 i 60.1

-I4,0931. 4 8 41 . 61.0 ! 4n 4

5.01611 5.8 5:9 I 6011 60.2

4;88211 5.5 5.61 60.9 ; 60 4a ,51i 4.8 4.9 I 61.31 60:8

5,21331, 5.5 561 61.71 61.3I

7,929 ; 8.3 8.51 61 61 61.27,4061. 7.6 7,71 62.01 61.1

6.9011; 5.9 7.11 62.6; 52,1

5.2021' 6.0 6.1 . 63.5 i 63.2

6.137 .- 5.8 5.81 64 01 53.7

7.3711 7.0' 7.1 1 64.11 63.8

_5 273 11 7.5 7.61 64.2' 63.9

13.67' ii 9.7 ! 64 31 64 0

10.717 9.51 9.61 64 4 ; 64.0

haLseaso/ aausted.2 unemmoyed as percent of labor larte- mcludmg_res.dent A! mien 1,.)tc-1 labor _1:arce. ,ncluOng Jesmant Armed Forces as cerc en! of n;:0 nstitutionai population inch/611g resident Armed Forces.

Cnnnan i-JOur force as Getter? pr c.vtltan nsni.1,1111t1 , onat.p.:Dulation_Stt,C1-:y Cerr.P1 tile «0'7 earlier data !me to population aomstments as

-follows: Beginn-mg 1953_ introduction of 1950 Census

data !.drle7 . poowal u ann nout 251.090 _to- abor_lar,:c...fnfarernatnymenr. inn _agpcultural employment. Beginning

1960. -Inc,..sion_ot_AiaSkT., !4,2!, arle^e acou: 50C.000 to uopulatton, about '1'000- !t.- labor_fo!da, _and _about 240.000 to

nonagncultur at employment . .; ,noe 1962, -inIr ccuction_ot_ 3960 censiit tale_ redu...., by about 30,000 and labor-force-and

empiu about _2(10.C.,7 Lec,-,mng, 1212 ,ntroounon of 1570 census -data added- i- ut_ 600.000_tri_cenhan nomnstautfonal

p,opulatm- about 333,000 :0 :aJOr 4orte arid employ:mem. A .ShOsedOent_adiustment has; r on 1970 census -,n -M-anch--1973.added

latia! force and- t." employment 9eg!nning 1978, changes In sampling- ano-e oration _procedures_ intraoucea rota the

.4.1s-el.:Oh survey added about 250.000 to labor force anti f 0 emPloyme. .1nernt,ICynle levels ana rates were not s.grpfle4nt.i

affected.

SOOFICE: Depart vent of Labor, Bureau of Labor StOtistics.

Ch. 4Effects of Programmable Automation on Employment 167

aggregate buying patterns; which will in turnaffect production and employment. For exam-ple, spending by and for older Citizens willgrow in absolute terms and relative to spend-ing on child-reEtring expenses.

Given_ the tendency of employers in theUnited States (and other industrialized na-tions) to reward seniority by lowering the riskof layoff as tenure rises; the loss of job oppor-tunities associated with programmable auto-mation or business slowdowns first affectsyounger workers and new job seekers;38 Manyanalysts believe that slow growth in the num-bers of young adults will lessen competitionfor manufacturing jobs, _lowering the risk ofunemployment in manufacturing industries.This may particularly affect durable manufac-turing, since werkers tend to move out of jobsin those industries as they age. Also, whileMiddle-aged workers are generally not re-cruited for entry:leyel jobs, they may begin tofill such jobs in the wake of the decline ofyounger worker groups. Declining numbers ofyoung Worker41 lso have a favorable ef-i)et t .ri -nt rates generally, since

teem. . ..nYe accounted for about one-tenthOf the p6pulation but ah" one-fourth ofcyclical employment vanation;89

An otder labor force means a more experi-enced work 'ince. Shortages of experiencedworkers have been cited by emplo7ers in thepast as a justification for aut imating. For ex-ample, manufacturers have cited the aging andretirement of experienced metalworking crafts-men as a motivation for automating machin-ing operations. On the other hand; new tech-nology, especially rapidly changing technol-ogy, may make fresh training more importantthan experience foi, some categories of tech-nicd personnel. This is I elietred to be_increas-ingly so for e :Timers, for example.9° Skills c)b-

"See, for el.ample, Robert E. iigl; "The Importance of Life-time Jobs in tlie U S. ELJnomy," American Economic Review,vol. 72(4). Sepi-mber 1982.

"U.S. Department c. Lab.- ( )(lice of the Assistant Secretaryfor Policy Evatuttion; am) iti.qeargth; "The Demographic Com-position of CYclicr..; Viiri.tiOns in Employment," Tech-nieg An.:1!-vsis Paper No. 61, January. 1979.

"Douglas 1.3raddock. "EngineersHi,, ?.r Than Average Riskof Obsolescence?" Occupational Qufh,ok Quarterly. Summer1983.

257452 0 -. 04 - 12 : QL 3

solescence may inhibit the substitution ofmore available middle -aged and older workersfor declining numbers of younger workers, orit may stimulate industrial retraining. An in-crease in the incidence of unemploymentamong older workers may raise new core erns.Once displaced, the oldest workers (5ii; andover) apparently have the longest spells of un-employment, are most likely to suffer pay cutsupon obtaining a new job after being unem-ployed, and_are least likely to change occupa!tions.91 A major uncertainty is whether andhow employers will adapt their_ personnelPia64:tices in response to new technological anddemographic conditions.

The contrast between the United States andJapan in rates and extent of adoption of pro-grammable automation reflects in part theirdifferences in population and age structure.The Japanese population aged more quicklythan that of the United States (reflecting thelack of a "baby boom" in the postwar yearscomparable to that in the United States) (seetable 43). Since the late 1960's, the J7-tpanesehave experienced laboishortages th it helpedto motivate their adoption of PA. In part,these Shortages arose from slow grcArth in newlabor force entrants; in part, they grew out ofnational norms, including low.- Female laborforce parcicipat.ion, preference single-shiftemployment, early mandator? rctirenient(be-tWeen 50 and 60), and growiag unwillingnessof high school graduates to Czo unpleasantphysical vorlt.92

Finally, U.S. labor force will also,developa "new look" due to growing proportions ofminority and female workek-s. Programmableautomation may have an important effect onminority employment, in particular, sinceblacks anti Hispanics are now rela4-: wellrepresented in manufacturing jobs, especiallyin the lower skilled operative and laborer

Philip Runes. "% he Labor Market Problems of Older=i," and Malcolm H. Morrison, "TI. Aging o: the U.S.

:ion: human Resource Implications :nth in Monthlyr-iitiur Review; May 1982

"See Robert E. Cole, 'P,,rticip.-ition and C.7ntro. in J, eseIndustry," paper prepared for Coli.ference on Productivity, Own-en hip, and _Partleiptitini., Agency for International Develrnvnt, U.S. Departfrient of Labcr, May 1383; and Koike,"Japanese Workers in Large Firms."

185;;,-,04954

Table 43.==.1apanese Population and Forecast (both sexes) (thousand persons)

ars ot age.) 195(1 1960 1970 '980 1990 2000 2010 2020 -- 2030 2040 2050

Id (years 1i .,0) 29428 28;087 24;823 21,546 23,327 21,180 22,210 19,402 17;588 17;865 15;960

4 11.20'; 7 844 8,806 . 8;564 7,002 7;427 7,162 5,897 6,022 5,816 4;924

9 9.523 9.295 8.159 10,035 7;862 6;823 7 091 6,410 5,724 6,084 5,275

14 8,700 11.018 7,858 8,947 8,463 6,930' 7;357 7;095 5.842 5,965 5,761

64 (years of age) 49 653 60,002 71,566 78,790 86,325 86,880 82,942 78,343 75,747 66,578 64.465

19 . 8,568 9,309 9;064 8;232 10,007 7.847 ' 6,813 7,680 6,402 5.717 6;075

24 . 7,726 8,316 10;660 7;811 8;913 ' 8,44'.2 6,915 7,342 7,079 5,830 5,952

29 6,185 8.209 9,089 9,073 8,183 9;964 7,819 6,788 7,653 6,378 5,696

34 5.202 7,518 8372 10,786 7,758 8,868 8,406 6,886 7.312 7,051 5,806

6) 5;048 6,038 8,207 9,215 9,00:.` 8.135 9.918 7,782 6,757 1;617 6;349

44 4.483 5,019 7;340 8,322 10,679 7,697 8,808 8,349 6,839 7,262 7;002

!:9 4.005 4,817 5,878 8,092 9;982 8.897 3,048 9,811 7.r99 6,684 7,535

54 3,389 4,201 4,805 7,153 8,132 10;481 7;572 8;663 8,211 6,727 7,142

59 2,749 3,641 4,425 5,622 7,803 8,819 8,651 7,824 9,539 7;458 6,498

64 2,304 2,932 3,726 4,469 6,766 7,732 9,992 7,218 5,256 7;827 6,410

and over 4,109 5,350 7,331 10.50 14.699 21.174. 26,964 31,029 29,479 29,590 28,872

- 69 1,771 2,160 .2,984 3,939 ' .77 8;151 7,990 7,226 8,811 6,913

74 1,282 1.564 2.134 2.995 1 6,780 8.758 6,32; 7,231 6,8.5C

- 79.. 686 955 1,268 2,024 i9 5,769 6 5f.,4 5,425 5;801 7;074

- 84 276 483 650 1;088 2,5615 5.382 4,694 r 057 4,376 4.994

and over 95 188 296 533 1 _99 2,181 3,029 3,444 3,371 3,035

3and total (33,"."2 93.419 103,720 116,916 124 129,234 132.116 128,774 122.814 116033 109,297

IRCE Javan Econorrne Research Center.

136

Ch or Pf.;grain;nable Automation on Employment 169

categories (see table 44). Minorities may notbe well-positioned in the event that manufac-turers seek to upgrade educatioral qualifica-tions, since they are much more likely thanwhites to have fewei. than 12 years of educa-tion (see table 45): Also, minorities are diA)ro:portionately likely to experience labor marketdiscouragement." Finelly, while Workingwomen are principally employed in trade andservice industries, about 15 percent work inmanufacturing. A.1thoSt half of female manu-facturing persbnnel are Operatives, an occupa-tional category eSpecia17. susceptible to dis-placement.94

Japanese Mechanisms of AdjustmentGiven thy; 1' eat attention now paid to Jap-

anese manuracturing practices and labormanagement relations, it is useful to examinehow Japanese firms have adjusted their workforces with the adoption of automation dur-ing periods generally characterized by outputgrowth. Japanese experience reveals that theunique industrial and social stratification prac-,ticed there shapesand to some extent ob-scuresthe incidence of clisplacrment:

Japanese manufacturers who automateoften protect their work forces by alteringtheir use of subcontractors and suppliers,tr...cisferring personnel, and changing workhetirS, as well as by increasing output. Thesearo fairly convendonal approaches worldwide:However, other Japanese practices are morepeculiar to the Japanese context; and are nowa source of controversy in Japan; as theywould certainly be in the Un'ted States: Theseinclude the "preferential" iaymg off of workerssuck as worrier, r'::,7t-time, temporary, andmiddle-aged and older people.

A r-,ken.t Japanese survey reported de--Creased reliance on outside firms and the in-ternalization of more aspects of production,with an accompanying 20 percent or more de-creas wom.-,n and part-time (mostly female)

"Philip L. Bones, "The Labor Market _Problems of OlderVorkers.- Monthly Labor May ;

Departrient of Labor, I3ureau of 1.,iitinr StatiSticS, Ern-nioytnent and E:,;nrs. Me

- - -- -__

workers. At the same tithe, the trae ..)f micro-electronics technologies had Wrougl, consid-erable changes for 70 percent of users. Work-ing Mint fell (or a second shift was adopted);and on average, production employment fellby 40 percent, with affected personnel beingabsorbed by transfer to other work:" Thesurvey of Japanese electrical machineryworkers reported a 60 percent overall declinein staffing caused by microelectronics; affect-ing peripheral as well as immediate taeks;more often than not; temporary and part-timeemployment fell first with the introduction Ofmicroelectronics:96 Interestingly, that surveyreported that workers perceived a problem ofunderstaffing:

More detailed evidence comes from recentJapaiw!se case studies. In one transistor andintegrated circuit plant, before automation;there was one person per machine; after auto-mation the ratio was one to two; productionscheduling went from multiple to two shifts,and people were laid off: In a relay-n:::

:ng plant; the introduction_ofa reducti m in overtime -and the alloeati:inworkers to other tasks elsewhere in the plant.The adoption of an automatic component 1..Toc-assing systeni i i an electronic cash registerplant re-stilted in a work force decrease from' 00 CO 65 (chiefly by laying Off women) and themovement Of work_ (20 percent) in-house th,ac,was previously performed by subcontractorn.Finally, an MIL:mobile manufacturer fouildthat robots allowed the direct labor time re-quired in small-car manufacture to decline by.about one-half during the 1970's; but outputgrowth alkiwed employment to rise. However;seasonal and temporary employment fell:97

TheSe practices reflect the th-,;t that thevaunted Japanese syst:f_ of "permanent em-ployment" is largely limited to male workers

Ministry of Labor Report on Microelectronics -and Its-Im-pact on Labor." cable from Ameiicrin Embassy (Tokyo) to U.S.Secretary of State, August 1983.

"Denki Roren; !Survays on the Impacts of Micro-Electrorucsand Our Pelitiea Towards Tet-nnotogied fmsovation;" paper pre-sented at the ati IMF World Conference for the Electrical andElectronics Incius.ries, Oct. 3-5. 1983.

'",)spar .1...,abor Association, "A Special Study ConcerningTeeinological Innovation and Labor-Management relations.Interim Report, Jiih0 1983:

18,

170 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workgace

Table 44.-Minority Employment PatternsEmployed black and Hispanicorigin workers by occupation /numbers in thousands)

Occupatron

1982

Totalemployed

Total416 years and over . 99,526In

Whde.collar workersProfessional and technical

Health workersTeachns. except collegeOther professional and technical

Manager s and relnpnatrators, except farmSr, alien workers5.11 emoloved s in retail trader

Self eon/toyed *pikers. except retail trade

Sales worker'sRetail tradeOther industriei

Genial workers .

Stenographers typists. and secretariesOther clerical workers

Blue-collar workersCraft and kindred workers

CarpentersConstruction vim workers, except carpentersMechanics and rend, errMetal craft workersBlue-collar worker supervisors, not elsewherecastled

53,47016,9513,2633,266

10,422

11;4939;630

8381,026

6,5803;3103;270

18;4464:855

13,591

29;59712;2721;9622;509

. 1,668

Percent of total

BlackHispaniaotigin

Occupation

1982

Totalemployed

Peicent of total

BlackHispanicorigin

9.2

6.66.47.39.05:3

3.94.03.33.5

3.84:92.8

9.47.5

10.1

10.96.74.28.46.27.1

5.2

3.52.62.52.42.7

2.92.84.83.1

3.34:32:3

4.84.15.1

7.55.54.95.45.65.6

6 :7 5.2

Craft atlict kindred workers-ContinuedAll other craft workers

Operatives. except treroPOftDurable goods manufacturing .

Nondurable goods manufacturingOther industries ..

Transport eguiornent operativesDrivers. motor vehiclesAll other

Nonfarm laborersConstructionManufactunngOther industries .

Service workersPrivate househi rid workers . .

Service worker ., except arrrate householdFood service workers ,

Protective service weal kersAll other .

arm murmurs . .

Farmers and I..rn mulagersnar m laborers a d si.wervisors

Paid workersUr.;,Pd .smIy workers

2,467 6.6

9.429 13.53,966 12.53;054 16:32;409 11.5

3,377 13.12,921 12.5

456 17.5

4 ;5I9 15.1722 16.6880 15.7

2,916 14.6

13,736 16.71.042 28,2

12;694 15.74;760 10.21,546 13.86,388 20.4

2,723 5.51.452 1.21,271 10.41.028 12.7

244 .4

6.0

10.0_9,811:28.8

6.56.19.2

8.219.78.67.5

6.38:2D.26.44.06.57.1

.614.517.8

.4

Employed War ane work...irs by tricluVry (numbers in thousands)

Incluxtr

1982

TotalPef.ent o1 total

Hispenrc-7raron I

1982

IndustryTotal

employed

Total, 16 years and over 99;526 9.2

Agriculture 3,401 5.5Mrnrng 1,028 3.0const,u0,0,-, -5,756 6.6Mainutacluring 20,286 9.4

Durable gcreds 11;968 8.4Lumber and wood products 627 :1.7 3 4 who.,,,... ,,, retail tradeFUI, .ture And fix pries 601 h 9 11.9 lortinima trade

Eloise. clay. and Lila, products 539 0.5 6.0 Rend trade

Pi imary metal rndush les 925 : -.I 7.7 inane, ins.,ance. am; ,...si estate1,..honaied metal procucts I -,264 /.2 8.0Mach, et y. except electrical eip. - lent Z;558 5.6 4.7 Se.vice industrial

,'Icc' ,al rut...tin-lent 2;295 7.4 .5.0 Pr.vate howchold

Transco" i., eguiPment 11,931 11.4 3.4 Other se, vice rodustrie

Autumn .yes 353 13.7 2.7 Butmess repair serv.t.c.

Other trArdporret, -. egurprnern 1.078 9.6 4.:. Persona ..vicesIns:ruments an I related 131,1f,u0: 600 7.2 6;0 Eider tainmerd and acrIt.on ter ,Other durable -io-nit and ..,.rim 750 _6.0 : 9.1i Proltshonal servo-,

ate, ',able goods .. .,15 10,8 7.0 Med.. ", .:ce. I hospit,

a', .ii,r1 ,re.Ared orodurts 1;733 11 -c_ 9.6 How.uis...role mod o.,1 is 6e8 12.3 4,1 Wer 'Joe are elittion

:Apgar,- le d rther lex tde produe'r 1,1:9 13.6 14.9 Eauc,.. .,10.2 3.9 Other

Fiintrnd erM othishmg 1,62: .5.6 :1.5 Forr...-ry and f..! "...6,als t .3 e .0...1 V r odu c I 1 1,211 .1.: 1 3.6

Fr.abber an, Lae r product, 6-,J 1 9.0 1 7.0 Pu.Aic administratic .

1OURC'=.8 ,_. Z. Depart-Per I .1 Lab .4. L.-..7,i )yment and Ee.rnengs (Z;Ouse!,:!,!. data, annual yrages). May '

5.2 Nondurable goods -ContinuedOther nondurable goods industries

7.4 , Transportation and pubbc utrhtres5.4 Railroads Ind railway express5.3 Oche, T.. importation6. Curr. 'cations and other public utilities .6.1

188

Percent of total

icBlack

Hrsuen

581 12.6 7.1

6;552 11.0 4.8469 10.0 3.0

3,121 11.0 5.72,961 11.7 4.1

20,758 6 54;120_ 5.4

I6 ;6 i 6.86,270 7.7

30,259 11.41,271 26.4

PI' 088 I0,74;452. 8,42;222 11.21.138 6.9

21 c'.7 11,43,518 11.1

Z.

5.04 :84:8

4.64.67.84.45.66.94.63.83.9

Table 45.-Relatfra Educational Attainment (years of school completed of the

civilian labor force by age, sex, and total race: 1980)

United States

Total White 81%,

vernale

American Indio,

Eskimo, and Aleut

and

Pacific Islander Race; n.e.c.

Male- FeMale Male Female Male Male Female Male Female Male Female

Total, 16.years and oyer 53;926;488 44;523;329 51884626 37;307269 5;33L ! 333;571 250,908 947,2E 825,596 1,430,219 887,912Less than 12 years of school 16;222;652 10;159;951 12911874 _7771;259 2,190,0 1,.';%;293 127;689 81413 168,430 170,231 823,856 458,75512 years of school . ... 21;(160614 18;733366 18;596168 16;143;347 1;1305:4'1. ,,,..1!;1,651 116474 99,176 215,261 234,536 346,701 274,65613 to 15 years of school 1858576 8853;090 9:553401 7;476;901 8711.04 10113;719 61;129 51557 193337 178,275 179,005 127,62d16 years of school 5;961;883 3920345 5;514833 3450;474 246877 315;042 13863 10249 148145 127914 38165 25,06617 or more years of school 5;803,363 2,848,077 5308350 2,465,288 215;998 237,09 14;416 8113 222;107 114,640 42;492 21,737

Total; 16 16 19 years ....... . 4,327,040 688 3,723280 3,299,319 393,790 356,351 29,623 24,531 49,033 45,693 131,314 95,694

Less than 12 years ol 8Chddl , 2,744,64; '47 2326,551 1,755,939 269,180 192,809 20,725 15,077 28259 23,190 99,935 62,13212 years of school 1,355,987 qH 19 1,197,645 1,271,856 108,070 132,581 8,034 8,274 15,20:' 15,736 27,1336 28,29213 'o 1. of school 225,867 12,645 271,073 16,494 30,924 855 1,180 5,554 6,743 4,319 5,27016 years of school 40t, 321 405 46 37 3 = 18 N 2017 or more years of school 12' 16 118 46 4 -rola), 20 to 24 years 8,263,921 : '..60 6,972,907 5,957,291 835;619 860;510 57692 44;761 107,1V 107088 290;506 190;310Less than 12 years of school 1,592,999 802,539 1,180,568 570,260 237,959 147,281 19;134 9;868 13;679 11483 141;459 6364712 years 61 school 3,792;265 3,219,990 3,259,965 2,708,832 377,032 383,484 26,276 21;5C3 33;892 31;747 95;100 74;42413 years to 15 years of school 2,142,726 2,292,112 1,856,557 1,925,094 185,589 266,266 10,742 11,685 43,492 44;454 46:346 44,61316 years of school 584,405 712,315 538,01 637,534 28,506 53,656 1,059 1,358 10,741 14;047 0 ,46 572017 or more years of school 151,526 133,004 136,986 '15,571 6,533 9,823 481 347 , 5 191 3;357 2 335 1;906

Total, 25 to 29 years . . 8;619,669 6;464;535 7;291;610 5256;841 847;620 864;181 54;739 41656 145761 139,224 279,939 162,627Less than 12 years of school . 1,250,521 698,572 893,364 467;608 199,207 147,419 14,092 8,167 15,273 16,889 128,585 58,48912 years of school 3,195,756 2,531,940 2,711,880 2,056,606 350,632 369,717 22;355 17;858 30;769 31,170 80,120 56,58913 to 15 years of school 2,094,412 1,591,880 1,793,909 1,298;401 198,268 215,174 13;231 11,242 39;053 35;217 49.951 31,84616 years of school 1,224,142 1,033,079 1,118,074 903,150 65;500 88;389 2,811 2;734 26;893 29;868 10;864 9;93817 or more years of school 854,838 609,064 774,383 531,076 34;013 43,188 2,250 1;655 33,773 26,080 10;419 6,765

T6W, 30 to 34 years . ...... 8035553 5547299 6,880,960 4,589,364 728,309 751,094 49304 37,410 162,205 143,625 214,775 125,806less than 12 years of:sohoo! 1;160;683 _ 756784 843,409 516,412 184,164 155,476 12,053 8,691 14,731 20,551 106,326 55,64812 years of schoot . 2579525 2;331754 2;206;051 1,925,320 276,010 . 317,065 17,969 15,367 21,214 32,065 52,281 41,93713 to 15 years_o school ; 1870;915 1;252;612 1;620;551 1;021;973 157;960 172,246 13,020 9,207 33,782 30,169 35,602 19,01716 years of school, __ 1;189;947 676855 1090;094 583,029 54;15 i 56,713 3,116 2,256 33,083 30,647 9,503 4,21017 or more years of school 1234;483 629294 1;120;855 542;630 46;024 49;594 3;146 1,889 53,395 30,187 11,063 4,994

Total, 35 to 39 years 6,331,497 4,574,260 5,466,520 3,778,441 556,144 570,894 38,114 29,15 18,939 105,897 144;780 89;895Less than 12 years of school 1,229,649 813,962 '32,100 579,941 188,021 159,539 12,456 8,590 12,798 ;7,404 64;274 48,40812 years of ScThooI 2,237,539 2,038,954 1,964,043 1,741,774 206,858 232,939 13,320 11,838 21,303 26,091 ;2,015 26,31213 to 15 years of school 1,169,738 874,367 1,019,616 731,276 94,509 108,282 7,808 6,073 20,985 18,511 6 920 0,22516 years of school ....... 726,e53 425,028 663,482 365,752 31,379 34,142 2,036 1,276 25,137 21,624 (9 2,23417 or more years of school 930,918 421,969 887,279 359,698 35377 35,992 2,494 1,376 48,746 22,267 ,J22 2,635

Total, 40 to 69 years .. 23,501,469 16,344,045 20,735,939 13,977,101 1,907,687 1,795,396 101,611 71,993 343,572 279,329 362,730 220;229

Less than 12 years of school 7,795,580 4,776,175 6;349;701 3,665;359 1;063;416 855;221 47;536 30;103 76;996 77;862 2,531 147;63012 years of school 7,758,238 7,023508 7,104,k7 6,317,026 480,805 539;023 28;134 24;102 85239 96;70: ti,r-ni 46;65413 to 15 years of school , 3,271,231 2,461,227 2,974,826 2,167,274 205,631 222;661 15;329 1:993 49;646 42;728 25;799 16;571

16 years of school 2,173,016 1,052291 2,043,231 933,699 65,767 80,509 4752 2;717 51;523 31456 _7;743 3,92117 or more years of school 2,503,304 1,030,747 2,313,674 893,743 92,058 97,893 6,920 3;378 80,168 30;580 11;474 5;453

Total;_70yearsAnd over 844;339 511;619 763;410 448;912 61;623 53;212 2426 1,404 10,573 4,740 6,305 3351

esslban12_y_eals of school 448,470 262;772 38611 215740 48856 40518 1,693 917 6,494 2,846 5,246 2,721

12 years of sc)ool ......... 160;704 130;481 152;077 121;933 6;003 ,6,842 366 234 1;642 1,024 590 44813 OA gars of school 93;687 65;702 89;297 61;810 3;253 3;166 141 177 825 453 168 9616 years of school 63,312 26,711 60,800 26,905 1;528 1;507 _86 _8 778 248 13 43

17 or more years of school 78;166 23;953 75,055 22,524 1,983 1;149 119 68 __ _83_4_ 169 43_115

t.e c Not elsewhere c1,13s1fied,

3OURCE Burrui or the Census.

-,

172 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, EducatiOn, and the Workplace

Table 46.-Employed Persons and Employees by Occupation, Japan (ten thousand persons)

Employed persons:

Year Total

Both sexes: Annual

Professional Managertand technical AM: _

_wo_rketS - Officials

Clericaland

..a.a'edworkers

Safe__workers

Farmers.lumber.

men, andfisher-men

Miningworkers

Woke;s ,ti.mspur

and communication

occupations

Crarl int ,-1:-../ ('

..(.;:.:act,-'proces:.workers_ Calinurere

- -

Protectiveservice Workers

and_service workers

average:19/5 5:223 364 206 820 738 654 .7 237 1580 148 457

1976 5.271 380 215 828 754 634 10 242 1;589 151 457

1977 5.342 339 212 850 778 625 19 238 1;603 159 465

1978 5.408 399 204 871 791 626 7 243 1,511 160 486

1979 5,479 426 217 898 784 605 5 244 1,628 164 497

1980 5.536 438 220 924 797 570 5 248 1,653 168 501

1981 5.581 452 228 945 811 552 5 238 1,659 207 473

1982 5138 471 22C 973 838 543 4 237 1,648 210 480

Change over the year:1976 48 16 3 8 16 -20 1 5 9 3 0

1977 71 9 -3 22 24 -9 0 -4 14 a .8

1978 66 10 -8 21 13 1 -3 5 8 1 21

1979 71 27 13 27 - 7 - 21 2 1 17 4 11

1980 57 12 3 26 13 -35 0 4 25 4 4

1981 45 14 8 21 14 - 18 0 - 10 6 395 -28°1982 57 19 3 28 27 -9 -1 -1 -11 3 7

Change over the year:1916 (1 9 4 4 4.4 1.0 2.2 - 3.1 2.1 0.6 2.0 0.0

19/7 1 3 2 4 -1.4 >7 3.2 - 1.4 0 0 - 1.7 0 9 5.3 1.8

1978 1.2 2.6 - 3.8 2.5 1.7 0:2 - 30.(, 2.1 0.5 0.3 4.5

1979 1 3 6.8 6.4 3.1 -0.9 - ::,.4 0.4 1.1 2.5 2.3

1980 1.0 28 1.4 2.9 1.7 - 5.8 1.6 *,.5 2.4- 0.8-

'1981 08 3.2 3.6 23 1:8 - 3.2 - 4.0 0.4 23.2° -5 6°

1982 1.0 4.2 - 3.5- 3.3 - 1.6 - 0.4 - 0.7 1.4 1.5-

Percen-tage-distabuiro-Both sexes; _Annual average:1975 100.0 '.0 3.9 15.7 14.1 12.5 0.2 4:5 3Q.3 2.8 8.7

1976 100.0 7.2 4.i 15.7 14.3 12.0 0:2 4.6 -. 30.1 2.9 8.7

1977 100.0 7.3 4.0 '....',-, 14.6 11:7 0;2 4.5 30..0 3.0 8.7

1978 100 0 7 4 3.8 10.1 14.6 11:6 0:1 4.5 29.8 3.0 9.0

1979 100 0 7.8 4.0 16.4 14.3 1.1:0 0:1 4.5 29.7 3.0 9.1

1980 100.0 7.9 4.0 16.7 14.4 103 C 1 4.5 29.9 3 1 9.0

1981 100 0 8.1 4.1 16.9 14:5 9:9 0.; 4.3 29.7 3.7 8.5

1982 100.0 8.4 3.9 17.3 14.9 9.6 0.1 4.2 29.2 3.7 8.5

Male: Change aver ow_year.1975 100.0 6:3 6:0 12.4 14.0 10.0 0.3 6.7 34.9 2:9 6:3

1976 100.0 6 6 6:2 12.2 14.3 9.7 0.3 6.8 34.5 2:0 5.3

1977 100.0 6 6 6.1 12.2 14.6 9.6 0.3 6.7 34:4 3:0 6.2

1578 100.0 6.6 5.8 12.1' 14.6 9.6 0.2 6.9 34 3 2:9 6.5

1979 100:0 6.7 6.1 12.6 14.? 0.1 0.1 6.8 34:3 2.9 3.7

1980 100:0 6.9 6.2 12.6 14.4 8 5 0.1 6:9 34:4 .. 9 6.7

1981 100:0 7.1 6.3 12." 14.6 8.4 0.1 6:6 34:2 3.5 6.3

1982 100 0 7.4 6.1 ;2.9 15.0 8.1 0.1 6:5 33:9 7.4 6.3

Female: Change over the year:1975 100.0 8.0 0.6 21.^ 14:4 16:8 CO 0.9 22.1 .27 12. 1

1976 100.0 8.2 0.6 -..6 14:3 15:9 0.0 0.9 22.9 2.9 12.

1977 100 0 S. =1 0.5 .-,2.0 14:5 15.1 0.0 0.8 22.8 2.9 12.7

1978 100.0 3 7 0 ' 21:9 14:7 14...: u.0 0.7 22.7. 3.0 12.9

1979 100.0 (.2 4 C.6 22:2 14.3 14.:. 0.0 0.P 22.3 3 1 .2.8

1980 1C0.0 95 0.5 23:1 14.3 13.1 p.0 0.7 22.6 _. : 12.7

193' 100.0 9.7 0:6 23:6 14.4 12 S 0.0 0.6 22.7 4 1 11.8

1982 100.0 9 8 _ 0,5 24:0 14.6 1:...1 0.0 0.6 22.0 -4.3- -2-0

TrN Ocr;upational ,,,r the Labour I orce Survey revised in January 1981 le corresp_ondio_IA4 p_ationat (.Fed > the lir:,

Population Cens is Workers in rr,ling and Quarrying occuerti as" beiie_rmel reclassified as "_Ntinieg workers nnd "SWP,:pers and garbag,' (T. sr, previousl,.

lister! as Protect,ie service and_service_workeiS' are classili,..J as ''Labourers" tile currentAs of _January_1961_There Nere 320,000 "Sweepers and garbage men.' elate and 230,0M female.Take the above e,planation into consideration when the difference or 7erce Tape yearotooyear change ci monthly el mates are used.

SOURCE "Annual Report of the I.abovr For:1 Survey," Statistics Bureau, Office of Ins Prime Minister, Japan, 1982.

190

Ch. 4-Effects of Programmable Automation on Employment 173

Table 46.,-Employed Persons and Employees by Occupation,Japan (ten thousand persons)-Continued

Employee St

Professional Managers. and technical and

Year Total workers officials

Clerica1l5and

relatedworkers

Salesworkers

Farmers;_Lumber -_filen:, and

fisher-men

Miningworkers

Workers intransport

and corrnu-_ tileationoccupations

Craftsmenand

oeoductionprocessworkers

_

Labourers

Protective__service workers

and_service workers

Both sexes: Annual average:' 1975 3,64 304 205 775 427 41 9 220 1,216 132 315.976 3:712 316 214 783 448 41 9 225 1,224 135 315

1977 3,769 322 211 803 463 43 10 222 1235 140 31719/8 3,799 329 '201 818 470 40 7 226 1,233 141 3311979 3:876 352 215 844 476 38 5 226 1,237 144 336',1980 3,971 364 217 867 497 40 4 229 1,260 148 3421981 4,037 377 226 886 t 506 43 4 220 . 1,272 -- '184 3171982 4.C98 394 217 909 537 41 4 220 1,269 187 315Change over the year.1076 66 12 9 8 21 0 0 5 8 3 01977 5" 6 -3 20 15 2 1 -3 11 5 21978 30 7 -10 15 7 -3 -3 4 -2 1 141979 77 23 14 26 t -2 -2 0 A 3 51980 95 12 2 23 2' 2 -, 1 3 23 _4 61981 66 11 9 19 a 3 0 - 9 12 36° 25°1982 61 17 -9 23 31 -2 0 0 -3 3 -2

Change OVC.,7 Ms'. year (°o): .-,

1976 1.8 3.9 4.4 1.0 4. 0.0 2.3 0.7 2.3 0.01977 1.5 19 - 1.4 2.6 3.3 4.9 - 1.3 0.9 3.7 0.61978 : 0.8 2.2 4:7 1:9 1.5 -7.0 -30.0 1.8 -0.2 0.7 4.41979 2 0 7.0 7:0 3:2 3 - F (1 0.0 0.3 2.1 1.51:180 2.5 3.4 0:9 2:7 4.4 ::,...; 1.3 1.9 1.8181 81 1 7 3 6 4.1 2.2 1 g 7.5 -3.9 L14.3°_2.8

2 7.3°1982 1.5 4.5 -4.0 2.6 6 1_ - 4 7 0.0 -0.2 1.6 -0.6

Pc nNige distributionFIG.:: sexes:- Change over the year i.',):

: 17'; 100.0 8.3 5.'.. 21.3 11 7 1.1 0.2 6.0 33.4 3.6 8:64- ,.. 100.0 6.5 5.8 21.1 12.1 1.1 0.2 6.1 33.0 3.6 8.5

100.0 8.5 5.6 21.3 12.3 1.1 0.3 5.9 32.8 3.7 8.41978 100 0 8.7 5.3 21.5 12.4 1.1 0.2 5.9 32.5 3.7 8.719%9 100:0 9.1 5.5 21.8 12.3 1.0 0.1 5.8 31.9 3.7 8.71980 100.0 9.2 5:5 21.8 12.5 1.0 0.1 5.8 31.7 3.7 8.61981 00.0 9.3 5.6 21.9 12.5 1.1 0.1 5.4 31.5 4.6 7.91982 100.0 9.6 5.3 22 2 13:1 1.0 0.1 5.4 31.0 4.6 7.7

Male:1075 100.0 8 7.8 16.1 12.1 1.3 0.4 8:2 37.5 3.5 6.3976 100.0 1.1 8.1 15.8 12.5 1.3 0.e. 8.3 369 3,5 6.2

1977 100.0 7.0 7.9 15.8 12.9 1.3 0.4 8.2 36:7 3.7 6.01978 100.0 6.9 7.6 16.3 12.8 1.2 0.3 8.4 36:5 3.6 C,.41979 100.0 7.1 8.0 16.3 12 8 1.1 0.2 8.2 36.4 3:5 6.41.250 100.0 7.2 7.9 16.2 13.0 1.1 02 8.2 36.1 3:6 641981 10(.0 7.4 8.1 16.2 13.0 1.3 0.2 7.8 35.8 4:2 6:01982 100 C 7.7 7.6 16.4 13.7 1,2 0.1 7.7 35.6 4:0 5:8

Fernale:_1975 100.0 11:6 0.9 32:2 11.1 0.8 0.0 1.5 24.6 3.7 13.71976 100.0 11.5 1.0 32:2 11.1 0.7 0.0 1.4 24.9 4.0 13.31977 100.0 11.7 U.9 32:4 11:1 0.7 0.0 1.2 24.8 3.8 13.31978 100.0 12.2 0.7 32.0 11:6 , 0:7 0.0 1.1 24.5 3.9 13.41979 100.0 13.1 0 8 32.A 11:4 0:7 0:0 1.2 23.3 4.0 13,11980 100.0 13.0 0.8 32 11:6 0.7 0.0 1.0 23.2 4.0 12.91981 100.0 13.1 0.9 32.. 11.6 0:6 0:0 0.9 23.3 5.3 11,41182 100.0 13.2 0.8 33.2 11.9 0.7 0 0 0 9 -2-2-4_ 5.6 11.2

`1.ha Occupational Classifications tOr tne Labour Forci,. Survey were revised in Jaluary 1981 to correspond to the Occupational Classfications used in the_1980P-Jouiation Census. "Wotkers 'n rnini!in And quarri,i_ngtccupalions'_' flay° bnen reclassified as "Mining workers,' and "Sweepers and garbage men" previously listed--as -Protective service and service worke,, are class,fied as "Lebow ars" in thcurrent SUrvily..,ts of _,:anuary 1981, there were 320.000 "Sweepers a!,(1 parbage men.- 130,000 male and 230.000 female.Take the at;oye explanatium into cnnsideration whsn differen!...e or percentage for year toyear change of monthly estimates are used.

NOTE-Employees are subset of emplDyea tears that is not selfenployed.SOURCE -Annual Repori at the Labour Forte Statis,ics C,e,,u, Office of the Prime Ministei, Japan, 1982.

191

174 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, aid CiltiOin; and the Workplace

in large firms.98 BecauSe of that !..ystem, none-theless; Japanese employers are less free thanU.S. employers to lay off personnel. They havean incentive to minimize hiring of "regular"employees; and to increase use of others whoseranks can more easily be tilt (see tables 46 and47).

Note that U.S. einplOyers 1-9ve incry3s.?:4).ff,-

ly resorted to the use of tOzt -yThe temporary help servic. :stry in theUnited States has been growing, and the pro-portion of temporaries comprised of such pro-fessionals as engineers, scientists; and tech-

"See Robert E. Cole. "Participation and Control in JapaneseIndustry." paper prepared for Conference on Preductivity. Own-erShip, and Participation, Agency for International Develop-ment, U.S Department of Labor. May 1983.

nicians has_ also been growing. (Statistics arenot available CO show_ trends for manafactur-ing industries alone.) As noted by the NationalAssociation Of Temporary Services:

By hiring temporaries, companieS ran cutstaff without layoffS. They can hire temporar-ies for ShOrt:term projects too large or too spe7cialized for their permanent staff to handle. BB

Because adopting PA raises companies' fixedcosts, many of them might seek to increaserelianCe on temporaries or part-time person-nel, where feasible, to lessen their vulnerabilityto downturns.

"Sam Sacco, "The WOrfri of High-Tech Temporaries," Wash-

ington Post (Advertising Supplement). Apr. 24, 1983.

192

Ch. 4-Effects of Programmable Automation on Employment i75

Table 47.-Employed PoesonS by Industry and Status in Employment; Japan(for employees; number of persons engaged in enterprise) (1982)

Employees

Industr/ Tow

1.20.per3ons 3Ct persOns,and-over 500 pRtson and overGovernmentemployeesTotal

1.4persons

5-29persons Total

3099 _persons

100499persons Total

9p5e°r0S s

1,000 gipersosand over

Both sexes -..,

1) p098 1.408 339 . 1,069 2,184 632 591 962 184 778 498

2) 30 18 7 f11 6 3 2 1 6

3) 16 ..12 5 7, 3 2 1 r

4) 14 6 2 -5. 3 2 -55) 4,068 1,390 332 1,058 2,178 628 589 961 183 777 49Z6) 14 8 1 7 6 3 2 1 1

7) 10 3 - 3 6 1 3 _3

8) 423 257 56 201 164 78 38 -48 10 _38

9) 1,151 324 46 278 625 220 226 378 77 301 1

10) 125 48 7 40 77 33 20 17 5 12

11) 147 29 4 26 117 25 29 _64 13 _51

12) 557 120 16 103 437 91 106 239 42 197

13) 66 8 1 7 58 -7 11 40 4 36

14) 103 49 8 40 54 24 17 13 5 8

15) 131 31 4 27 100 25 29 4G 12 35

16) 1513 21 2 19 137 25 34 78 12 66

17) 99 11 1 10 *88 10 16 61 _8 53

18) 322 127 19 108 194 _71 _64 59 17 42

19) 1,059 470 146 324 583 150 149 284 55 229

20) 870 443 135 309 423 139 126 159 42 117

21) 337 138 25 114 198 73 62 63 19 45

22) 534 305 110 195 _225 66 63 96 23 72 3

23) 128 95 37 58 _32 16 9 7 2 5

24) 189 27 12 15 160 11 23 125 12 113 2

25) 364 51 4 47 263 47 53 163 16 148 50

26) 331 51 4 46 240 46 51 142 15 127 39

27) 34 - - 23 1_ 1 21 20 11

28) 847 276 77 199 329 127 119 83 25 57 241 .7

29) 427 112 31 82 120 48 46 - 9 17 194

30) 420 163 45 118 209 79 73 57 17 40 47

'11) 195 - - - - 195

Percent male1) 65.40 60.30 55.75 61.74 68.09 63:13 65:82 72.66 71.20 73.01 67.87

9) 65,94 58.02 63.04' 57:19 69.09 56:76 63.87 79.37 72.73 81.06 100.00

12) 73.25 68.33 75.00 66.99 74:60 63.74 67.92 81.59 73.81 83.25

14) 75.73 75.51 87.50 75.00 75:93 70.83 76.47 84.62 80.00 87.50

15) 77.10 74.19 75:00 74:07 78.00 76.00 72.41 82.61 75.00 82.86

16) 59.96 42.86 50.00 36:84 59.85 41.67 52.94 71.79 58.33 72.73

17) ..... 80 81 63 64 100:00 70.00 82.95 70.00 75.00 88.52 87.50 88.68

Percent female1) 34.60 39.70 44.25 38.26 31.91 36.87 34.18 27:23 28:80 26.99 32.13

9) 34.06 41.98 39.13 42.45 31.03 42.34 36:73 20:63 27:27 19.27 100.00

12) 26.75 31.67 25.00 33.01 25.40 36.26 32:08 78:41 26:19 16.75

14) 23.30 24.49 25.00 25.00 22.22 25.00 25:53 15.38 20:00 12.50

15) 23.66 25.81 25.00 25.93 22.00 24:00 27:59 17.39 16.67 17.14

16).- 43.04 57.14 50.00 57.89 40:88 62:50 47:06 29.49 41.67 27.27

17) 18.19 36,36 an nn 15 -91_ 30 00 25.00 11.48 25.00 11.32

I) All industries2) Agriculture an8 forestry3) Agriculture4) For_e_attY_and_hu n1Lng_5) Nonagrioultural industires61 Fisheries and aquaculture7) Mining _

8) Construction9) Manufacturing

10) Textile nib) products

SOURCE "Annual Report of the Labour

11) Chemical and related products12) Metal and machinery13) Iron, steel and_aon-ferro.us

metal industries14) Fabricated metal products15) Machinery, weapons, and

precision machine16) Electrical machinery,

equipment and supplies17) Transportation equipment

Force Survey," Statistics Bureau,

18) Other manufacturing-19) Wholeaad,_tatall_trade;_ilnance;

Insurance and real estate20) Wholesale and retail trade21) Wholesale trade22) Retell trade23) of which Eating and drinking

olace24) Finance, Insurance and real

estate

Office of the Prime Minister, Japan, 1983.

193

25) TrarLSOOrt, bodmmUnioatlon,_electricity, gas, water, steamand hot water supply

26) Transport and communication27) Elactricity..gas, water, steam

and hot water supply28) Services29) Professional services30) Omer services31) Government

176 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment; Education; and the Workplace

Table 47.-Employed persons by Industry and Status in Employment; Japan-Continued(for employees; number of persons engaged in enterprise) (1982)

Self-employed workers Employees (regrouped)

Industry Total TotalWith Without Family

employees employees _workers Total

Regular employees

Temporaryemployees

Daylabourers

_Total

Ordinaryregular

_employees Directors

Both sexes1) 5.638 943 193 750 587 4;098 3.692 3,399 294 278 127

2) 502 240 7 234 232 30 20 18 . 2 3 6

3) . 484 237 6 232 231 16 10 9 1 2 3

4) 18 3 1 2 1 14 10 10 1 3

5) 5,136 702 186 516 355 4,068 3,672 3,380 292 275 121

6) 46 t8 2 16 t3 t4 13 12 1

7) 10 10 9 9 1

8) 541 88 37 51 31 423 346 299 47 25 51

9) 1.380 161 29 132 68 1,151 1,053 978 75 75 24

10) 208 65 5 60 18 125 110 101 9 11 5

11) 166 13 2 10 6 147 138 131 7 7 .212) 614 40 10 30 17 557 520 490 31 29 7

13) 67 1 1 66 64 62 3 1

14) 127 16 5 10 9 103 95 85 11 5 2

15) 143 8 2 5 4 131 125 115 10 6 1

16) 175 15 2 13 2 158 142 137 5 13 3

17) 102 1 1 1 1 99 94 -91' -3 _4 1

18) 392 44 12 32 26 322 284 257 28 29 9

19) 1,501 258 77 181 183 1,059 948 830 118 90 22

20) 1.298 246 -75'- 171 179 870 765 659 106 84 21

22) 376 24 8 16 16 337 323 278 45 10 4

22) 919 222 67 155 163 534 442 381 61 74 18

23) 237 67 33 34 41 128 95 _85 10 26 7

24) 206 .1,3 2 11 4 189 183 171 12 5

25) 382 -15 2 12 3 364 350 339 11 11 3

26) 349 2 12 3 331 317 306 11 10 3

27) 34 34 33 32 1

28) "- 1,065 162 39 123 56 847 767 727 39 64 16

29) = 510 66 19 46 17 427 396 381 14 27 4

30) 554 96 19 77 39 420 371 346 25 37 12

31) . 195 195 184 184 8 3

Percent male1) 60.98 68.61 82.9 64.93 17.55 69.40 68.82 67:81 79:93 26.98 50.39

9) 61.23 45.96 96.55 34.85 17.65 65:94 70:18 69:33 82.67 18.67 25.00

12) 70.68 57.50 100.00 43.33 23.53 73.25 76:92 76:12 83.87 20.69 28.57

14) 73.23 75.00 100.00 70.00 22.22 75.73 78:95 77:65 81.82 40.00 50.00

15) 74.83 62.50 100.00 60.00 25.00 77:10 79:20 79.13 80.00 16.07

16) 53.14 20.00 100.00 92.31 56:96 62:68 6131 _80.00 7.69

17) 80.39 100-00 100 00 100 00 80:81 84.04 83.52 100.00 25.00

Percent female1) 39.03 31.39 16.58 35.07 82.28 34.60 31.20 32.16 20.07 73.02. 49:61

9) 38.77 54.04 3.45 65.15 82.35 34.06 29.72 30.67 17,33 81.33 75,00

12) 29.15 42.50 - 56.66 82.35 26.75 23.27 23.67 16,13 79:31 71:43

14) 26.77 18.70 - 30.00 77.78 2130 21.05 21.18 18.18 60,00 _ 50.00

15) 25.17 25.00 - 40.00 , 100.00 23.66 20.00 20.87 10,00 66.67 100.00

16) 46.29 80.00 -- 7.69 100.00 43.04 37.32 38.69 20:00 92.31 _66.67

17) 18.63 - - 100.00 18 18 1.5 % 16 48 75.00 100.00

1) Ail_industrieS 11) Chemical and related products 18) Other manufacturing 25) Transport, Communication,2) Kgriculture and forestry 12) Metal and machinery 19) Wholesale. retail trade, _finance, efactrtdity-gaS.,..w_ater, steam

3) Agriculture 13) Iron, steel and non-ferrous inaurance_and_ real _estate__ and hot water supply4) Forestry and hunting metal industries 20) Wholesale and retail trade 26) Transport and communication5) Non agriculture industries 14) Fabricated metal products 21) Wholesale trade 27) Electricity, gas, water, steam6) Fisheries and aquaculture 15) Machinery, weapons, and 22) Retail trade and_hOl_water supply7) Mining precision machine 23) of which Eating and drinking i28) ServicesAl COnStritctio.n _ 16) Electrical machinery, equipment place 29) Professional services9) Manufacturing and supplies 24) Finance, Insurance and real 30) Otherttendces

10) Textile mill products 17) Transportation equipment estate 31) Government

SOURCE- "Annual Report of the Labour Force Survey," Statistics Bureau. Office of the Pdme Minister, Japan. 1983:

19

Chapter 5

The Effects ofProgrammable Automation on

the Work Environment

Contentspur

Summary 179

Introduction179

Bat:kg-round180

OTA Work Environment C4Se Studies 183

Case 1Small MetalWorking Shops 185

Case 2Agricultural Equipment 186

Case 3Commercial Aircraft '187

Case 4 The Auto Company 188

Case Study Theme§ 189

Work Environment Impacts 191

Organization and Nature of Work 191

Changing Skill Levels 194

Training 195

Occupational Safety and Health 196

Labor-Management Relations 204

European and Japanese Experiences 209

Japan 209

Norway and Sweden 210

West Germany 212

Appendix 5A.Methodology Employed in OTA Case Studies of theEffects of Programmable Automation on the Work Environment 213

Case 1Small Metalworking Shops 213

Agricultural Equipment Company 214

Commercial Aircraft Company 214

The Auto Company 215

TablesTable No

Page

48. Characteristics of Small MetalwOrking Shops Studied by OTA 183

49. General Characteristics of Manufacturing Firms Studied :33, OTA .. : .184

50. GM Robot Safety Standards:Suggested Safeguards 197

51. Employed Wage and Salary Workers Represented byLabor Organizations by _Occupation and Industry, May 1980 207

52. Workers' Technology Bill of Rights 208

19g

Chapter 5

The Effects of ProgrammableAutomation on the Work Environment

SummaryA number of factors determine the impacts

of programmable automation (PA) on the workenvironment, such as how the technologiesare designed and applied; the strategies em-ployed to introduce them; and management'sgoals for automating. In general; the introduc-tion of PA tends to improve the work environ-ment. However; it has the potential to createnew situations that are stressful or monoto-nous; resulting in negative psychological ef-fects on the work force. PA offers a wide_ rangeof choices concerning its usechoices that, ifmade well, will help to ensure that PA is ap-plied in ways that will maximize its potentialfor affecting the workplace positively.

Nothing inherent in automated technologymakes a particular form of work organization"imperative"; PA affords many ways of orga-nizing work and designing jobs. For thisreason, it is possible to design and apply tech-nology so that it will enhance, rather than de-tract from, the work environment, and tosearch for ways to design jobs that are com-patible with both technology and the human-ization of work. The search for such compati-bility will be complicated by the potentialtradeoff between conventional concepts ofpro-1,,duction efficiency and more complex concepts':;_of worker satisfaction. There is some, but lim-ited, evidence that using PA to organize workin ways that would enhance the work environ-

ment would lead to increased overall efficien-cy and a more motivated work force.

In the firms visited for the OTA work envi-ronment case studies, the implementation ofPA made some jobs; such as maintenance,more challenging, and some such as spot weld-ing, less physically taxing. Other jobs, suchas operating a numerically controlled (NC)machine, were less challenging when comparedwith operating conventional machine tools.Some jobs had high evelp of stress due to thenature of the equipment (i.e., complex, highlyintegrated, and expensive), and to the relativelack of worker autonomy in controlling thecontent and pace of work.

Labor-management relations play an impor-tant role in the introduction of new technolo-gy. Using collective bargaining; organizing;End political strategies, unions in the UnitedStates have attempted to minimize what areperceived to be the socially harmful effects ofnew technologies on the labor force. Theirefforts have generally been directed towardeasing the adjustment process rather than re-tarding the process of change. Japan andmany Western European countries rely on .anumber of government and organized labormechanisms for dealing with the introductionof new technology and its effects on the work-place.

IntroductionProgrammable automation has the potential

to enhance the work environment in manufac-turing. It will do so if it reduces the need forworkers to imdertake hazardous or unpleasant

tasks and is applied in ways that provide vari-ety and opportunities for decisionmaking inthe workplace. As work becomes increasing-ly automated, it is important to consider the

179

1. 9 7

180 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Eniployment, Education, and the Workplade

role people will play relative to equipment, andhow we as a society will define and overseethat role.

The purpose of this chapter is to describesome of the effects on the manufacturing workenvironment arising from the introduction anduse of PA, and to discuss some of the waysin which workers are likely to be affectedr-physically and psychologically. The approachis different from that usually taken in discuss-ing PA technologieS, their benefits, and theircosts. While acknowledging the economic andtechnical issues surrounding PA developmentand use, the chapter focuses on the experiencesand concerns of the people working with thetechnologieS daily. These concerns seldomemerge in studies of R&D and industry char-acteristics, but they suggest additional socialcosts and benefits beyond the more obvious

ones associated with changes in the numberand types of jobs.

Attention to how PA affects the work envi-ronment may gain new urgency in the ' futuredue to reduced job mobility in manufacturing.As chapter 4 suggests, workers who are un-happy about their working conditions in thewake of new technology may have less free-dom to change jobs because of reductions inproduction employment, changes in the occu-pational mix, and other developments con-straining job opportunities. If the potential forjob mobility decreases, the characteristics ofremaining and new manufacturing jobs willbecome increasingly important, creating new \imperatives for developing the potential capa-bilities of the technology to improve the workenvironment.

BackgroundThe effects of PA on the manufacturing

work environment in the United States mustbe considered within the context of traditionalviews of technological change. The apprehen-sion surrounding technological progress andits potential to change the fabric of society isnot new. What is different abOut current atti-tudes concerning new techndldgy is directlyrelated to its flexibility, its diverse applica-tions, the large number§ ofpeople that will beaffected; and the social and pOlitical climatein which it is being introduced.

As early as the mic171850's, America wasviewed by Europeans as a country that eager-ly and easily embraced teeknology as a re-placement for manual labOr. This was in starkcontrast to the open resistance_to industrialprogress experienced in Europe. The Americancapacity for rapid innovation, was variously at-tributed-to such diverse factors as its publiceducation system, a scarcity of labor, its dem-ocratic institutions, its utilitarian attitudes;

an abundance of natural resources, and theenterprising spirit of its citizens.'

However, contrary to this idyllic view ofAmerican industrial progress as perceived byforeign visitors, historians record that even inthe 1850's, technological change in the UnitedStates did not occur without very substantialcosts to its citizens. For example, the worklives of skilled craftsmen were changed greatlythrough adjustment to the new requirementsof industrialization, such as increased regimen-tation and less individuality. Unskilled work-ers were also affected adversely, since theirskills were interchangeable and there werethus fewer opportunities for wage increasesand other benefitS.2

Ili the late 19th century, the principles ofscientific management proposed by Frederick

i 93

'Merritt Roe Smith. Harpers Ferry Armory and the NewTechnology: The Challenge of Change (Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1977).

'Ibid.

Ch. 5The Effects of Programmable Automation on the Work Environment 181

W. Taylor attempted to rationalize the produc-tion process by deterMining the "one bestway" to do a job.* In addition, these principleshelped to form the view that efficiency de-pends on the degree to which managementcontrols both the production process and theworkers. In_ many manufacturing settings;vestiges.. of Taylorism still exist in a top-doWnstyle of management -control characterized byrigidly defined taSkS, attempts to minimizeerrors through increased automation, andminimal worker invOlvement in workplacedecisions.

Today; it is generally recognized that tech-nological developments tend to continuallyoutpacs the capacity of individuals and socialsystems to adapt.3 This period of adjustmentmay be characterized by considerable tensionbetween management and labor.

One of the principal benefits of computer-ized manufacturing technology is that it of-fers a wide range of choices for system designand implementation; With respect to the prob-leins encountered in earlier technologicalChange; one author commented:

The changes and diSruptionS that an evolv:ing technology repeatedly caused in modernlife were accepted as givens or inevitable sim-ply because no one bothered to as whetherthere were other possibilities.'

The very flexibility of PA provides a range ofchoice, not only in the equipment configura-tion, but also in the organization and manage-ment of production. As stated by a contem-porary British researcher:

We are not compelled to follow the path wehave followed so long, of subordinating workto the machine; and fragmenting it, until thebest thing we can do with the jobs that re-main is to automate them out of existence.We can if we wish provide a path through

*Frederick W. Taylor 11856-1915) revolutionized Americanfactory production with his time -mind- motion studies: This stand-ardization of tasks, known as Taylorism, left workers with lit-tle or no opportunity to exercise either control or judgment overtheir work or workplace.

'See. for example, Langden Winner, Autonomous Technology(emnbridge, Mass.: The MIT Press, 1977).

'Winner, op. cit.

which human skill is preserved, . . . by evolv-ing into new skills in relation to new ma=chines.6

While the design of a machine or system es-tablishes a basis for its effects on the workenvironment; the specific circumstances inwhich the technology is introduced also playa crucial role in shaping the environment ofthe automated workplace. In practice; the im-pact of a programmable system is influencedby an array Of "environmental" - factors; suchas managerial goals, the age and physical lay-out of facilitieS, the types of technologyalready in use, the ways in which work hasbeen (and will be) organized, management pol-icies and practices, the attitudes of workers,interpersonal relationships, and the characterof labor-management relations. This context,together with the technical capabilities and ac-tual performance of the new system, deter-mines the effect of computerized automationon the work environment. .

The choices made for system design andim-plemeritation reflect value judgments. Theminimal attention devoted to work environ-ment issues in this country reflects the viewthat production efficiency is a finictibri ofequipment design and selection, and a judg-,ment that worker attitudes are secondary atbest. On a more basic level, value judgmentspertaining to workplace issues reflect a dispar-ity in available evidence. It is relatively easyto measure the performance characteristics ofa machine; it is difficult to measure reliablythe effects of equipment designsand confirmurations on worker attitudes and relatedchanges in productivity. The difficulty in-creases as the organization of productionchanges to accommodate new processes andproducts. Such organizational changes are cen-tral to the success of PA; they also distinguishthe work environment effects of PA fromthose of more incremental changes in manufac-turing technology.

How workers are affected by automationdepends very much on their individual person-

'H. H. ROsenbrfkk, "Robots and People,' Measurement andControl, vol. 15, March 1982, p. 112.

19J

182 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education; and the Workplace

alities, expectations, and needs; it is thereforedifficult to generalize about what a "good"work environment for the introduction of PA.As one author recently pointed out:

Workers are not all alike; they have differ-ent needS, interests and motivations. More-over, these characteristics constantly changeover the career of each worker, .. .6

However; there are some characteristics thatere generally recognized as having a positiveeffect on the work environment. Among themare fair wages and benefits, job security, aclean and safe workplace, interesting -work;some control over the pace of work, the abili-ty to make decisionS concerning howwOrk isperformed, recognition for work done well, op-portunities for personal growth and advance-ment,' and good relationships with peers andsupervisors.

Recognizing some of the important charac-teristics of a posith?e work environment, andrecognizing that these can help to alleviate thetensions of a rapidly changing workplace, newtechnology can be utilized in ways that facili-tate a harmoniouS interaction between peopleand machines, Achieving such harmony is thegoal of interdisciplinary research in so-calledsocioteehnical systems. The literature on so-ciotechnical systems discusses ways of design-ing jobs and changing work methods to con-sider 'both the social system_ of the work en-vironment and the teelmical system of pr6duc-ticin simultaneously _in order to optimize therelationship between the two.'

It is possible to design and apply teclmologyso that it will enhance the work environment,and to explore ways of designing jobs that ac-commodate both the technology and the needsof workers. The challenge is to introduce newtechnologies in ways that consider the aco--nornic and social impacts more equally. How-ever, there are conflicting interests involvedin considering simultaneously the economic,

'James O'Toole, Making America Work, Productivity andResponsibility (New York: Continutun, 1981).

'William A. Pasmore and John J. Sherwood (eds.), Sociotech-rrierd Systems: A Sourcebook (La Jolla, Calif.: UniversityAssociates, Inc., 1978).

social, and technical aspects of new tech-nology. One recent study of the impact ofmicroelectronics on the Workplace concluded:

It is not yet clear just what are the econom-ic costs of careful,, or socially acceptable, ap:-plications of the chip. Nor is it obvious, thatthe normal Market forces, or union pressures,*ill bring out the best in microeleCtrOnics forsociety.8

_Okun has suggested that pursuit of an effi-

cient economy creates inequalitieg, and socie-ty faces a tradeoff between equality and effi-ciency. If both are valued, and neither takesabsolute priority over the other, then compro-

.nuses ought to be made in places where theyconflict.9 In the case of the effects of PA onthe work environment, the failure to balanceboth social and economic questions as part ofthe overall dacision to automate will mean thatthe potential for PA to improve working lifewill not be realized. In the short term, only theeconomic costa- of considering the social as-pects may be recognized; over the long term,however, the cost of an unhappy worker maybe realizad as lower productivityThe concernextends beyond the individual PA user intoa potential social services problem that couldeventually affect whole communities.

The remainder of the chapter is divided intothree sections. The first describes four OTAcase studies of PA in selected manufacturingenvironments and discusses the principalthemes that emerged from these studies. Thenext section discusses some of the impacts ofPA on different aspects of the work environsmerit, incorporating material from the casestudies where it exemplifies these impacts.The final section provides an overview of ap-proaches to work environment issues in Japan,Norway, Sweden, and West Germany and theexperiences of these countries with the imple-mentation of new technologies.

!The Impact of Chip Technology on Conditions and Qualityof Work, Worldwide Search and Examinationof Eidence andInfluential Opinion, Report No; II44;_Ministry of Social Af-fairs and Employment, The Hague,_1982;

°Arthur M. Okun, E4nality and Efficiency: The Big-Tradeoff(Washington; D.C.: The Brookings Institution, 1975).

2

Ch. 5The Effects of Programmable Automation on the Work Environment 183

OTA Work Environment Case StudiesIn order to investigate the impact of PA on

actual work environments in manufacturingsettings; four case studies were conducted incompanies that are leading users of PAoneeach in the automobile; aircraft; and agricul-tural implements industries; and one encom-passing a group of seven small metalworkingshops. The threelarge companies studied wereselected out of a list of approximately 30 firmsthat was compiled in consultation with a num-ber of leading trade associations; The smallmetalworking shops were chosen after discus-

Totaletn pi OyeeS

Employees onshop floorAnnual sales

Table 48.Characteristics of Small

sions with knowledgeable individuals and or-ganizations in New England, the geographicregion selected. While the companies are alladvanced PA users, they differ in several im-portant respectS, including company size,product batch size, union representation, fi=nancial health, current level of market de-mand, and geography (see tables 48 and 49).*

*None of the participating companies is identified by_nwrie.One of thecompanies requested this courtesy, and OTA decidedto follow it throughout.

Metalworking Shops Studied by OTAAlpha Beta Gamma Delta Epsilon Zeta Eta

75 19 74 16 10 200 48

60 16 60 15 6 130_ 4058.2M $900,000 $4.5M $600,000 $300;000 $25M $2:75M -

NC and CNC 21 NC andmachine tools CNC

2 CNC lathes1 CNC miller16 NC millers

Year companyfounded 1969

3 CNC punchpresses1 CNC laser

, cutter/ 5 CNC press

brakes

6 CNC 4 CNC millers1 CNC lathe

12 CNC lathes2 CNC verticalmillers30 NC machines

21 NC andCNC machines;more than halfof these are CNC;2 CNC inprototype

1940 1973 1972 197A 1945 1942Year firstNC or CNCmachine toolpurchased 1974 1966 1976 1976 1979 1957PrincipalCtient-industries

Militaryaircraft:medical

Varied:electronics.

hydraulics.etc

Mostlyelectronics

Eleclronics,aircraft

Aircraft,medical

Aircraft,both military& commercial

ca. 1966Electronics,aircraft

Programing Digitalsystem "APT"

Genesis-Encode"

We b"Prompt"

Age ofprogramingsystem 3.4 years 6 years 3 years

Webb_ei_"Prompt"

6 months

Bridgeport"Easy Cam"

DigitalAPT"

GeneralNUMerit"Nurnexide

2 months 11 years 1 year,,Let sizerange"

Average ortypical lotsize'

10-150 254,000 - 102,500_ __100,5130.0_50-1,000 1.1,000 1400

50 250.500 100 250.500 250 100 50Employment Steadylevel growthover time

Stable for10 years,before thatsteady growth

Steadygrowth

Fluctuates, Growth.down from a recentpeak of 19 layoffsin 1960

Cyclical,twice as manyemployees inlate 1960's.Constant for last7 years

Stable

Size ofshop insquare feet 23.003 10,000 30,000 , 8;000 2,500 66,000 29,000"Lot size figures are rough estimates only.SOURCE Office of Technology ASsessment (data current as of Aril 1983).

25-452 0 - 84 - 13 : QL 320i

. ..

184 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, EduCation, and the Workplace

Table 49.General Cheratteristics of Manufacturing Firms Studied by OTA

Small shops Agricultural implements- Commercial aircraft -Auto-

Batch size Small, one of akind

Medium Medium Large

Company size 10.200 Components plant-10;000 40,000 in commercial Plant employs

at capacity aircraft division 4,000

Tractor assembiya500 630 in NC machine shop

300.000 to25 million

Company agricultural equipmentsates over $4 billion inSales

market share

Company claimed 56%of the Market in 1981:

CoMpany sales over$10 million in

1981; dropped in 1982, butshare of farm equipmentmarket climbed

in 1982, 48% 1982

Unionized Yes Yes Yes

Financialhealth

Good Dominant in industry Dominant in industry Improving overrecent times

Market Tends to fluctuate Slack Slack; operating at Recently picked

demand with demandfor clients'products-

500/a of capacity up

Geography Within_an hour of Small, Midwestern city " Medium-sized west Within hour of

Major industrialcenter in the

coast- city major industrialcenter in East

EastSOUCCE Office of Technology Assessment data current as 01 April 1983)

Six technologies were studiednumericalcontrol (NC), flexible manufacturing systems(FMS), management information systems,automated materials handling, robots, andcomputer-aided design (CAD).* NC machinetools receive particular attention in the casestudies because they are among the oldestmodern examples of the application of digitaltechnology to manufacturing, dating from theearly 1950's. As such, NC represents the back-bone of computerized production equipment,and is the most important application to dateof computers in small and medium batch ma=chining. In addition, although other program=triable technologies may monitor the activitieS,of workera or replace the worker entirely,. NCmachine tools continue to require the preSence

*As was discussed in ch. 3, FMSs integrate_NC and otherPA technologies into a larger computer-controlled system thatis the prototype of the automatin faci,ory. Management infor-maim' sys'ems and process data in a waythat provides note comprehensive and immediate informationto managemem about operations in both batch and mass pro-duction industries. Robota represent a versatile technology that

can be used in a wide range of production settings either aseland-alone machines or as part of a larger sygilem. CAD ex-emplifies the use of computers to transform the design proc-ess and the organization of the production process.

of an operator and significantly change thecharacter of the person- machine interaction.The changes seen in the NC operator's jobhave implications for other situations in whichthe introduction of PA may change the natureof the interaction between person and ma-chine, Thus, the work environment experiencewith NC may provide paradigms for other PA,including flexible manufacturing systems aswell as nonproduction PA technologiea.

The case studies are based on 3- to 8-dayvisits by two researchers to the three largecompanies, and 1-day visits to each of thesevencarnall machine shops. The aim of thecase studies was to identify qualitatively someof the important ways in which Pit is current-ly affecting the work environment in selectedsites; quantitative analysis was not fettaiblegiven the small number and the diversity ofobservations.* (See app. 5A for method ofStudy.) A brief summary of each of the four

*Thesample ofpeople interviewed was relatively small andnmandom, and the interviews explored a variety-of issues-with-

in, a defined range, rather than following a rigid format;

202

Ch. 5The Effects of Programmable Automation on the Work Environment 185

case studies follows; a section is includeddescribing the principal themes that emerged:*

Case 1Small Metalworking ShopsThis case study investigates the introdtur-

Lion and use of numerical control in sevensmall metalworking -shops-7-six machiningshops and a sheet metal fabrication shop (seetable 48). All of the shops work under contractto other companies (mainly aerospace, elec=tronics, and defense industries), and have nocommercial product of their own. The centralproduction technology in the plants is NC,currently one of the most mature and sophisti-cated of the PA technologies, in which a pre-programed code directs the operation of amachine tool by means of a controller. General-ly, these machine instructions, or "part pro-grams," are prepared remotely by a part pro-gram er. Computerized numerical control, arefinement of NC that was developed in themid-1970's. links a computer to the machinecontroller. This technical change brings aboutnew organizational possibilities because themachine instructions can now be altered (ed-ited), or even prepared, at the machine itself;

NC has a number of technical advantagesover conventional equipmente.g., easier ma-chining of complex parts, repeatability, fewerfixtures and setups, and increased flow of pro-duction. In addition to these advantages, man-agers also cited two other motivations for in-stalling NC equipment; One motivation wasto respond to theperceived shortage of quali-fied machinists by providing the ability totransfer skills from the shop floor to a partprogram, hence depressing the level of skill ac-tually needed to operate the machine. The sec-ond motivation for acquiring NC waste gainbetter control over shop operations. The pre-dictability of the technology led to more ac-curate production cost estimates when biddingfor new jobs and more reliable estimates of de-livery times.

*The contractor report, "Automation and the Workplace:Case Studies on the Intr6duction of Programmable Automa-tion in Manufacturing," will be available subsequent to publica-tion of this report.

Case Study ConclusionsBy reorganizing production in such a' way

as to centralize control and reduce the overallskill requirements of the shop, these ownershave brought about changes in the work en-vironment that substantially reduce the at-tractiveness of machining jobs; especially forskilled machinists. In general; less experiencedworkers and those whose previous work expe-rience was largely on NC preferred NC; whileworkers with high levels of skill'and extensivebackgrounds on conventional equipment didnot like NE machines unless they had becomeinvolved in programing. When the planningfunction is removed from the shop floor andtransferred to a programer, machining workis transformed in such a way as to be unat-tractive to the most skilled members of thework force although the usefulness of highskill levels was still emphasized by most of theshopowners interviewed. While reducing ma-chinist intervention in the production processhelps to guarantee that a minimum standardof quality will be met, it also limits the ingenui-ty and skill that might help to achieve a higherstandard of quality. If the input of the personclosest to the production process is substan-tially reduced or even eliminated; the loss interms of the quality of production could be siz-able; particularly when a skilled worker is oper-ating the machine.

Based on the sample of small shops visited,four strate:ees that would enhance the workenvironmei appeared technically feasible anddesirable from the point of view of workers onthe shop floor:

1. Programing of machines by their oper-ators, except in cases where there arecompelling technical reasons for doingotherwise (e.g., some programs are verycomplex. and writing them may requireseveral hours of careful expert attention,away from the distractions of the shopfloor).

2. Increased control over the editing of pro-grams by machinists who are at themachine; watching the execution of theprogram;

203

88 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: employment, Education, and the Workplace

3. Training in programing for-machinists, in-cluding rotation of machinists throughthe shop'S programing -department.

4; Trairiirig in machining that includes sub-stantial work on conventional machinetools, and periodic rotation onto conven-tional machines to provide more challengeand variety.

Each of these Changes that would enhancethe quality of the Work environment was pres-ent in an embryonic form in one or more of theseven shops studied. They are thus clearlytechnically feaSible, since they have alreadytaken place in a very limited way. They mayalso, in some cases, result in greater produc-tivity; But it is also_ true that after a certainpoint, increases in shop floor autonomy witha view to improving the work environmenttend to conflict with the shopowner's prefer-ences for managing the business; At thatpoint, fUrther improvements in the work en-vironment come at the expense of centralizedcontrol, which may also have implications forproduction quality. The issue of control, Ofcourse, is not peculiar to computerized auto=matiOn in manufacturing settings; it repre-sents one of the traditional workplace strug-gles between manageinent and labor. .

Case 2Agricultural EquipmentBeginning in the early.1970's, the company,

a midwestern manufacturer of agricultural im=plements and construction equipment, beganto install a wide variety of Computer-basedsystems in one of its principal businesses, themanufacture of tractors. Today, the companyis regarded as one of the leading users of PAin medium-batch manufacturing. This casestudy focuses on two of the company's plantsthat have been widely recogthzed as pioneer-ing automation effortS=the components plantand the nearby tractor_ assembly plant; Threemajor syitems Were selected for examination:1) a management information system; partic-ularly a labOr reporting subsystem; 2) theautomated materials handling system in thetractor assembly plant; and 3) the flexible

manufacturing system in the manufacturingplant.

From management's point of view, PA hasbeen vital to the company's success in an in-creasingly competitive industry. The technol-ogy has resulted in increased flexibility to re-spond to rapidly shifting market conditions,better product quality, and higher productiv-ity. An important factor contributing to pro-ductivity improvement has been the transfor-mation of what management saw as a seriesof difficult;to-control, stop-and-go operation§into a more tightly controlled, centrally di=;rected "even flow" of parts, suggestive ofoperations in continuous-process industries.

Case Study ConclusionsThe effects of increased automation on the

work environment seen in this case study fallinto four broad categories. The first covers ef-fects that are the intended result of manage,:rnent'§ desire for flexibility; rapid respon§e,and closer managerial control of operationaFor example, the ability of the company totrack parts through the production processmakes shop floor operations increasingly visi-ble to middle- and upper-level managers, fa-cilitating scheduling and making it increasing-ly possible to dictate_ the detail§ of productionfrom a_high level in the organization. This de-creases autonomy for superviSors by limitingtheir range of choices in certain scheduling andpersonnel matters.

The Second category of effects on the workenvironment stems from theimplementationprocess, broadly construed. For example, thedisruption caused by downtime and Schedul-ing irregularities resulting from the imple-mentation and debugging proceSS for highlycomplex and integrated computerized systemscan degrade the work environment. The per-sistence of such problems over a period ofyears, not just months, raises the _possibilitythat the debugging of one or another systemcould become a fact of lifeand of the workenvironmentat technologically advancedcompanies. Workers at this site wereparticu-larly affected by frequent downtime because

204

Ch. 5The Effects of Programmable Automation on the Work Environment 187

of their incentive pay system:* This systemhelps to create a highly motivated work force;and employees covered by the incentive pay

- system may use considerable ingenuity tokeep machines running. Machine downtime isnot welcomed by incentive workers, and mostof the workers interviewed expressed intense:frustration with automated systems that fre-quently broke down.

A third category of effects on the work en-vironment is brought about by the complexi-

s.ty and highly integrated character of the cap-ital7intensive installations; Maintenanceworkers found their work on a computerizedsystem exciting and challenging (according toone electrician: "This new technology is scaryas hell, but I love it"). However, the combinedeffect of the high cost of the system and the"domino effect" of a machine or system failurecreated considerable pressure as well. The in-tegrated nature of the operation made thefailure of any machine linkki to the larger sys-tem a more serious problem thari the failureof a stand-alone machine would have been. Ad-ditionally, most electricians interviewed feltthat the diagnostics now required more skillthaepreviously; however, the yepairs wereoften easier; particularly when they only in-volved changing a circuit board. Under theseconditions; collaboration increased among re-pairers and among different skilled trades.

The final category includeS effects thatresult from system designs that attempt (withvarying degrees of success) to minimize the ne-cessity for operator intervention. One of theproblems mentioned most frequently by oper-ators of flexible manufacturing systemsaswell as by maintenance workers on other high-

*This system combines a standard base rate with a bonusfor production above the standard rate. An operator workingat "incentive pace" earns about 130 percent of the "standard"base pay. The company aims to have production workers eligi-ble for incentive pay about 85 percent of the time, the remain-ing 15 percent being set aside for "inherent delay," whichincludes those parts of a job whose pace is out of the controlof the worker. During periods of inherent delay and downtimethe worker is paid the standard rate. The introduction ofautomation can influence incentive pay in two ways: 1) by re-quiring determination of new incentive standards, and 2) bychanging the proportion of inherent delay and downtime on thejob.

ly integrated and expensive systemsis thealternating boredom and pressure that char-acterize their jobs. The FMS clearly requiredsome operator input; yet it had not been de-signed to adequately acknowledge and accom-modate that input; in addition; operator train-ing may not have been sufficient.

Case 3Commercial AircraftThe manufacturer of commercial aircraft

that is the sul;lect of this case study is a_divi- _

sion of a larger aerospace corporation. Bothe division and its parent_ are widely reas being at the cutting edge of both productand process innovation in the aerospace indus-try. The case study has a dual focus: first; itexplores the use of computer technology torevolutionize the organization of work, prin-cipally in the design and engineering of the air-plane; then it lgoks at NC machining in a largeproduction machine shop. Since the NC ma-chine shop is a production terminus of astream of data that flows from design to themanufacture of a part; it is directly affectedby the organizational changes that are takingplace.

The company's use of CAD has resulted ina number of important benefits: 1) eliminationof routine work, 2) assured access to the most -up -to -date design, 3) reduction in errors, and4) the ability to revise designs more frequent-ly and to experiment more fully with designalternatives. A central thrust is to link theseparate design; business; and manufacturing-computer systems into a centrally directed; in-tegrated whole; and to thus move design deci-sions to a higher level in the organization. Thegoal is to create a controllable "stream" of in-formation governing the development and pro-duction of the airplane from the point at whichthe airplane is initially design&I to the pointat which it first lifts off the runway.

As in the case study of the small metalwork-ing shops, the use of NC has made it possibleto remove from the shop floor much of the de-cisiomnaking involved in part production, tak-ing away a substantial amount of discretionfrom those involved at the point of pr6duction,

205

188 Computerized Wanufacturing Automation: Employment, Education; and the Workplace 3

and relocating it earlier in the design to buildprocesS. Many of these decisions are now madeby programers; however, the operator retainsthe critical control over the speeds and feedsat the machine.

Case Study ConclusionSThe company goal to use CAD to establish

a stream of shared data has significant impli-cations for the work environment. For exam-ple, the jobs of engineers at earlier points inthe design process will become broader andmore challenging; but there will be proportion-ately less opportunity for creative work by en-gineers at later points in the design process.While this may be beneficial for the aircraftdesign process overall {iii particular, becauseof the special concern for quality and reliabili-ty of aircraft, relative to other goods), it is like-lyto have a negative effect on middle-levelworkers who have been accustomed to morechallenging work. Considerable amounts ofroutine data-handling will be eliminated by theestablishment of shared data requirementsand the automation of data transmission be-tween groups. In addition, there will becreased interdependence among variousgroups and functions within the company aseach group spends more of its time workingwith shared data.

Use of NC haS a number of effects on thework environment of insehinists at this siteNC has not eliminated the need for a skilledoperator, since- skill is still required in the formof alert supervision of the machine (rather thancontinuous active intervention); yet the remov-al of a sxibetantial part of the traditional ma,cliining work makes it more diffiCtilt-for theoperator to remain engaged in the cuttingprocess. The amount of latitude that NC ma-chinists have in the performanee of their du-ties is significantly reduced if &but the mostroutine programing is removed -from the shopfloor; this is a major faCtor in the bor domreported by operators.

The study found that interdependence hasincreased in the machine shop; since there aremore support groups; e.g., programers, in-

valved in the production of any given part.This means that a delay in any one area af-fects the operator's ability to produce partsquickly and efficiently. The_case study alsofound that the ability to dictate exactly howthe machiniSt'S job will be done makes it possi-ble for management to track an individual'sperformance more closely. In addition, an elec-tronic system makes certain aspects of shopfloor operations more visible to management.The system enables a machinist to page a sup-port group member and also monitors produc-tion at the 66 NC machines.

Cage 4The Auto Company

_ This case study examines the application ofrobots to spot;welding operations in an autocompany's Elaaemblx plant; In 1980; in' re-sponse to the increase in consumer demand forsmall cars, the company designed anew modelthat required a $60 million retooling at theplant visited. The bulk of the retooling tookplace in the framing side of the body shop,where sheet metal parts of the car are weldedtogether. In selecting machinery for its newwelding facilities, the company chose a systemthat provides what is perhaps the most ad-vanced frame welding technology available. Itinvolves a single fixture or "gate" that holdsthe sides, underbody, and other parts in placewhile eight robots apply spot-welds that setthe dimensions of the body. Most of the otherrobots in the plant apply "re-spot" weldswhich increase the mechanical strength of thecar.

The automated area consists of two majorcomponents: 1) the subassembly areas whereparts of the sides and underbody are weldedtogether; and 2) the "main frame" line wherethe sides, roof, and underbody are welded bythe robotic system and re-spot robots to formthe complete car b6dy. The case study focusedon the side aperture area where parts arewelded together to make the right and leftsides of the car, and on the main frame line.Sixty-four robota are located in these areas.

The robotic system has a number of majortechnical and economic advantages over pre-

200Jib

fCh. 57.1he Effects of Programmable Automation on the Work Environment 189

vious methods of welding: 1) the dimensionalconsistency of the body is assured becauseonly a single gate is used for each car type;2) the strength and quality of welded framesare improved because.there are fewer missedwelds, and the welds are placed identically ineach body; and 3) subsequent retooling costsare substantially reduced by decreasing thenumber of gates and clamps that have to bepurchased for each model.

Case Study ConclusionsTwo important specific benefits resulting

primarily from automation were observed. Thefirst was that robots have eliminated a numberof physically demanding hand-welding jobsthat required operators to work in the midstof sparks thrown off each time a weld wasmade. The second benefit is that automationhas substantially increased the breadth, chal-lenge, and interest of maintenance positions.To some extent, welder repairmen have takenon responsibilities traditionally handled bybasic tradesmen in that they maintain a widerange of electrical; hydraulic; and roboticequipment; an also program the robots;The corporate director of manufacturingengineering regards welder repairmen as animportant part of the company's move tome-crease_ productivity through combining jobclassifications.

However, the work environment has de-teriorated significantly for many productionworkers and supervisors. An intensification ofwork and an erosion of the quality of life onthe job for production workers in the bodyshop stem from the fact_that subassemblyjobs are now tied to a line. By tying subassem-bly work to a rhythm over which the workerhas no control, the automated system haseliminated the principal feature of off-line jobsthat made them more attractive than line jobs.Downtime on the automated system createstop-and-go pacing that is beyond the worker'scontrol; it also creates a situation where thesubassembly and main frame lines are runfaster in order to keep up with the rest of theplant. For repair supervisors, the responsibil-ity for maintaining operation of the complex,

highly integrated production system createsgreat stress.

It is important to note that these problemsarise not from automation or the introductionof robots per se; but rather from the systemdesign and operating practices. Two aspectsof the design are especially important: the ar-rangement of successive subassembly opera-tions in series, and the restriction of space_forstoring parts ,between these operations. Thedesign decisions are complemented by theoperating practice of storing even fewer partsbetween subassembly operations than spaceallows. By minimizing such "banks," manage-ment believes it can assure a steadier, higherquality, and more efficient production flow.

Case Study ThemesAt every company studied; a common theme

emerged: establishing more effective manage-rial control over the activities of the enterprise.In the firms that produced parts in small andmedium batch sizes, PA was the centerpieceof a strategy to establish a more managerial-ly directed flow of parts through production,in some cases approximating the even flow ofcontinuous-process industries. At the auto-maker, where the mass production of parts hasbeen carried out for years on a moving assem-bly line, the company sought to extend thisflow to the remaining off-line areas of the weld-ing operation.

The aircraft company also sought to stream-line the flow of information through designand engineering. In addition, it wanted tomove decisionmaking to as early a point in thedesign and manufacture of the airplane asvos-sible. An important corollary of these changeswas minimizing human input. This extensionof control in design and production, in manage-ment's view; makes possible a better coordina-tion and a more efficient use of the firm's re-sources; These organizational choices; how-ever, have important consequences for thework environment;

Because of the great variety of computer-based technologies, as well as 'qiie wide varia-

ti

207

1g0 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: EmployMent, Education, and the Workplace

tion among companies in terms of the environ-mental context into which these technologiesare placed, the findings of the four case studiesdo not suggest any one generalized impact ofPA on the work environment. Instead, someoverall th-emes-emerged to varying degreesfrom the different companies studied:

Changes in skill requirements and occupa-tional structure. There was a tendencyto embody skill in machines or to moveskill to an earlier point in the design andmanufacturing process. In occupationssuch as highly skilled machir*g thismeant that fewer skills would be fequiredon,the job. Maintenance work, however,tended to require more skills.Training. Some operators and mainte-nance workers expressed a strong desirefor more training that would allow themmore effectively to run or to repair themachines to which they were assigned.Increased interdependence.The intro-duction of PA brought about agreater in-terdependence among production work-ers, greater collaboration among mainte-nance workers, and the necessity for in-creased cooperation between productionand maintenance workers.Decreased autonomy. Computer-basedautomation is used in ways that result indecreased autonomy for workers, stem-ming from the removal of production deci-sions from the shop floor, the electronicmonitoring of some work areas, and the t"attempt on the part of management to eS-tablish an even flow of parts through theplant and of inf&mation through thecompany.Boredom. One of the consequences ofsystems intended to minimize operator in-tervention is that machines may run forlonger, although not indefinite, periods oftime without active intervention by theoperator. For some machine operators,boredom on the job has become a wide-spread complaint. Some maintenancetasks, however, have become more chal-lenging.

System downtime. Because of the com-plexity of programmable systems andtheir high level of integration, the effectsof problems with any_unreliable elementof the system tend to Spread, affecting thework pace of production workers and put-ting great pressure on those involved inthe maintenance of the system. Downtimemay decrease with better system designand more_reliable components.Stress. Two major sources of automa-tion-related stress_were identified: I) work-ing on very complicated, very expensive,and highly integrated systems; and 2) thelack of autonomy at work, extending insome cases to computerized monitoringby management.Safety. =Soiree applications of PA makethe workplace safer, either by eliminatinghazardous ,lobs altogether or byallowingthe operator to stand farther from themachine during operation. Other applica -.tions introduce hazards of their own, suchas automated carriers, clamps, and fixtures that move and close without directhuman initiation and sometimes withoutwarning. The net effect of PA, however,is a reduction in traditional physicalhazards.Cleaner and lighter physical .work foroperators.--=-Some forms of PA have re-duced or eliminated heavy or dirty work.In some cases, new jobs requiring physi-cal labor are created in the place of the old,heavier jobs.Job security. -The combination of sub-stantial layoffs at all the large companiesand the widespread perception amongworkers that the introduction of compu-terized automation caused significantdisplacement raised strong apprehensionsamong workers.

Further information on these case studythemes will be included in the following sec-tion concerning impacts on work environment,as well as in otherchapters of the report whereappropriate.

208

Ch. 5The Effects of Programmable Automation on the Work Environment 191

Work Environment ImpactsThe OTA work environment case studies

demonstrated some of tile effects of variousPA systems in selected environments. _Somerecurrent themes emerged regarding the na-ture of those effects. This section examinessome of the broader work environment issueswithin the categories of organization and na-ture of work, changing skill_ levels, training,occupational safety and health, and labor-man-agement relations.

Organization and Nature of WorkThe ways in which work is organized, to-

gether with the specific design features of PAtechnology, will help to govern the effects onthe work environment. In thg short term, thenew and emerging technologies will be adaptedto traditional structures of work organization;over the long term, the structures will changeto reflect the characteristics of the new tech-nologies. While it is too early to predict howthese changes will develop; the experience todate may offer some insights:

One of the most vivid examples of how theorganization of work in automated manuffic-turing can affect the quality of the work n-vironment comes from the allocation of p o-graming in an NC shop, as demonstratedlinthe OTA case studies. The introduction of NCmachinery is usually accompanied by the de-velopment of a new programing departmentand a new division of labor: The planning ofwork becomes more centralized and is movedoff the shop floor; so that planning and execu-tion become increasingly separated. From thepoint of view of management, this results inincreased efficiency and control over the pro-duction process. However, whether or not pro-duction workers are permitted to edit pro-grams on the shop floor, or in general engagein planning, can determine whether their jobsare routine and relatively boring or involve,instead, an element of challenge and decision-making. The assignment of work is a functionof managerial choice, but it also reflects thenature of the product. For example, in aircraft

manufacture, concerns for precision, reliabili-ty, and safety make control especially impor-tant. Other settings provide more latitude forworker discretion.

The organization of work in ways that re=move creative decisimunaking from jobs doesnot only apply to production workers. It is alsoreflected in the changes projected for engineer-ing jobs at the aircraft manufacturer as CADis used more widely. The jobs done earlier inthe design-build process will be broader andmore technically detailed, while the need forengineering skills later in the process will bereduced. The result will be less autonomy anddecreased opportunities to contribute to theproduction process in meaningful ways for en-gineers who are not performing the broad andcreative jobs at the beginning of the design-build process. According to the director of theCAD/CAM Integration Team:

Once the SyStem is in place, most of thedecisions are made; so you're taking away alot of individual decisions . . ; whoever's in-volved downstream is working in a lot moreControlled environment than he has in thepast.It is generally agreed that there is nothing

inherent in automated technology that makesa particular form of work organization "imper-ative.'"° For example; West German research-ers describe an alternative job structure fora flexible manufacturing system; although itsviability is yet to be provpn long-term.11 Underthe proposed alternative, the staff is compeSidexclusively of skilled workers, such as special=ists in machine tools. Some would have addi=tional training in electronics. All or most ofthe nonmachining tasks required -by the EMScould be performed by the operators, working

' °Joel A. Fadem; "Automation and Work Design in the U.S.:Case Studies of Quality of Working Life Impacts." publishedin ILO InternationalComparative Study, Federico Bawl. andJoseph Thurman (eds.) (AmsterdtiM: Ninth Holland, 1984).

"Christoph Kohler and Rainer SchultzWild, "Flexible Man-ufacturing Systems Manpower Problems and Policies;"presenCed at the 1983 World Congress on the Human Aspectsof Automation, Ann Arbor, Mich., August 1983.

209

192 Co puterized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

t

141

...._,..r.;;;i4 -.. ,

t.

,AG ...c-,......e.

INK

J.,.

61

yea

t

Photo Credit: Beloit Corp.

The dramatic change In the nature of engineering work is demonstratedln the threephotographs above (Top) penclkandpaper operation at the turn of the century.(Middle) more recent paperbased engineering-design,Oottom) the manipulation

of data through the use of computeraided design

Ch. 5---The Effects of Programmable Automation on the Work Environment 193

in job rotation; Only some of the programingjobs and major repair and maintenance taskswould have to be carried out by personnelworkiiig outside the system. ThiS _systemwould proVide considerable job Variety foroperators; in contrast to-the more traditierialhierarchical approach of combining workersWho have a relatively low level Of skills, andWhoSe jobs are highly specialized, with one ortwo group leaders or foremen with specialskills.

Research currently under way at the Univer-sity of Manchester (England) is attempting todevelop software that will enable the equip-ment operator to program an FMS by mak=ing the first bateh Of _parts.'? In thiS ekperi=ment, the human qualities of skill.and itidg=ment are not eliiiiinated, but are assisted andmade more prOdUctive. However, some ex=perts have expressed some skepticism aboutthiS proposal. They suggest-that it representaa cosmetic solution that would not work wellin practice, since the situation would be thesame for the operator after the first batch ofpart8 was made unless the parts were changedfrequently.

PA alsb has an effect on the nature Of work.A,,striking feature of the many systems ob-served during the company visits that haS Con=sequences for the work environment is theirhigh level of integration. This results in an in-creased interdependence among workers whoapa with these systems. For production work=

?ers, this interdependente Chiefly meant thatat certain stages of production the input orparticipation of others was necessary, requir-ing teams rather than individuals to complete.a job. For subassembly production workers inthe auto body shop, interdependence increasedbecause each individual was more closely tiedinto the pace of the system as a whole; Onesubassembly worker explained:

Before, you had more individual operations. yOu might have, maybe, two people work=

"H. H. Rosenbrock, The University; of Manchester Instituteof Science and Technology, "A Flexible Manufacturing Systemin Which Operators Are Not Subordinate to Machines," a pro-posal approved by the Science'and Engineering Research Coun-cil in 1983:

ing together, Well, now you have maybe five,Six, Seven, eight ... and everybody depend-ent on everybody.

The higher degree of integration results inmore synchronous work for all productionworkers, making it impossible for individualoperators to work faster or slower than others'in the system for more than several minutesat a time.

On the FMS at the agricultural equipmentcompany there was evidence of a greater needfor equipment operators to coordinate with the'system Superintendent in the computer con=trol room and with other operators.. EvenStandalone NC operators, both at the aircraftmanufacturer and at the small job shops, com-mented on their increased need to rely on pro-gramers and other support operations. Nolonger could a machinist execute an entire partalone, as was generally done on conventionalmachine tools. An NC operator at the aircraftcompany said:

On a conventional machine it's prettymuch just between you and the machine ..On the NC machine you've got the program-er, . NC _tooling, ... planning, and if anyone part of it breaks down, then the wholething goes.

A 'supervisor in the same shop also felt theeffects of this increased interdependence:

Supervising NC, you have to deal withmore support groups. You're more vulnerableto their preferences. There's more negotiationbeforehand with people like programing andfixturing.Maintenance workers experienced the

creased interdependence in their work chieflyas an increase in the need for collaborationamong the different skilled trades. The coin-pi6kity of- the new systems meant that, inmany cases, diagnosis and repair required the,input of workers with varying backgrounds.A skilled tradesman at the agricultural imple-ment maker described the situation:

You can save a let Of time by pootile work-ing,together and getting along. Otherwise atwo-minute problem becomes a- two-hourproblem. A few years ago you could do it by

211

194 -.Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

yourself; but now you need two heads; onemechanical and one electrical; and a goodoperator.There are opportunities for_enlarging the

scope of jobs with PA. The OTA case studyon the seven small shops outlines a numberof ways to improve job design for NC opera-tora=including involving them in programingand editing, and providing opportunities forjob rotation. With appropriate training, work-ers could be involved in a greater variety oftasks by rotating jobs, however, this would re-quire cooperation between labor and manage--ment in agreeing to increased flexibility inwork rules. Another opportunity for workersto perform a wide range of tasks rather thannarrow, fragmented ones is in the applicationof group technology, through the use of man-ufacturing cells producing families of partsgrouped on the basis of, similar shapes and/orprocessing requirements.

The flexibility of PA provides the potentialto achieve a better balance between the eco-nomic considerations that determine techno-logical choices and the social consequences ofthose choices in the workplace. There arecases where organizational and technologicalchanges have been combined successfully to?ield dramatic improvements in productivityand effectiveneas." While these changes gen-erally were motivated by_fictors other thanimproving the work environment, organizingwork in ways that improve the work environ;

= &lent Should result in economic payoffs as wellthrough better worker morale and productiv-ity.

Many of the concerns about the introductionof PA revolve around the changes it will bringabout in the organizationind nature of work.The choices made by those who design andmanage automated systems will have a pro-found effect on how these systems influencethe work environment.

"Robert Zager and Michae) P. Rosow (eds.), The InnovativeOrganization: Productivity Programs in Action (New York:Pergamon Press, 1982).

Changing Skill Levels

Chapter 4 discussed the changes in skilllevels and mixes that can be anticipatedthrough the introduction of PA on a largescale. This section deals with work environ-ment aspects of changing skills levels, _in-cluding perspectives gained from the OTAcase studies.

The ways in which work is organized andjobs are designed will determine both the skillsneeded to do a particular job and the overalllevel of skills required in a workplace usingPA. In general, PA_ gives rise to a greater needfor conceptual skills (e.g., programing) and alesser need for motor skills (e.g., machining)than are required for conventional equip-ment.14 Zuboff describes the new relationshipsbetween individuals and tasks that are createdby information technology as "computer-me=diated.'"s Computer-mediated work involvesthe electronic manipuladon of symboLsan Lb=stract activity rather than a sensual one Therewill be a greater need for workers to monitorand maintain systems rather than to actual-ly operate them, and more of the cleciaionmak-ing capability will be programed into the tech-nology. For instance, NC rnachinea have thepotential to significantly lower Skill require-ments for operators, compared to conventionalautomation.

In the small machine shops visited for theOTA case studies, the owners all reported thatthe use of NC allowed them to run their ma-chines productively using workers with lessSkill than would have been required on conven-tional equipment. The use of NC did not makemachinists' skills superfluoua, nor did iteliminate the need for Some highly skilledworkers in the shop, but it did allow the shopto function with a lower overall skill level inits work force than was previously possible.One shopowner commented:

"Barry Wilkinson, The Shopffoor Politics of New Tedmology(London: Heinemann Educational Books, 1983).

"Shoshana Zuboff; "New Worlds of Computer-MidiatedWork," Harvard Business Review-, September-October 1982,

pp. 144-45.

212

Ch. 5The Effects of Programmable Automation on the Work Environment 195

Five, six_ years ago we were very dependenton skilled labor, to the point where _I spenthalf my life on my hands and knee§ beggingsomebody to stay and do something. Andthey tended to be prima donnas: "I won'twork Saturdays- don!t work-nights."And this is one of the motivating factors inbringing in NC equipment. That reduced ourdependency on skilled labor.

In situationsi.where Less overall skill is re-qUired the application of a higher level of skillswill usually result in a more efficient operation;Even on a highly automated system; such asa flexible manufacturing system; human inputremains important. The initiative and judg-merit that are occasionally required for opti-mum operation of such complex systems maynot be present if skilled craftsmen and/or high-ly trained operators are not available.

The relative inix of skills required within theOrganization as a_whole may change with theintroduction of PA Systems. This will varyamong firms, depending on their products andpilkesses. At the aircraft manufacturing firm;establishing a "data stream" would affect thecompany's skill requirements throughout itsengineering operations. This would make thejobs done earlier in the design-build processbroader and more technically detailed, whilereducing the autonomy of engineers and theneed for skills later in the process. This hasadvantages for the aircraft industry becauseof its particularly stringent needs for qualitycontrol; As described by a company official:

A number of the people that are left willbe an element of a very controlled process.The ingenuity of the craft will have been re-moved. The adVantage is to have more con-sistent outcomes with the hiccups removed.People's actions will be more controlled bystrict procedures. The human part of the jobwill be less evident.

At the same time, many relatively routine jobswould be eliminated. If accomplished, thiswould bring about a substantial reconfigura-tion of skill within the company, a reconfigura-tion that will not necessarily be obvious froma list of occupational titles.

At the body shop of the automaker, therehas been a distinct rise in the ratio of skillednonproduction workers to production workers.This is due to reductions in the number of pro-duction workers as well as increases in skilledmaintenance labor.

TrainingChapter 6 discusses in detail the changes in

education and training needs that will resultfrom the widespread use of PA. This sectionprovides perspectives that may go unrecog-nized in explicit education and trainingoriented analyses and points to the fact thatattitudes about training complement otherattitudes and responses concerning new tech-nology.

The OTA work environment case study in=terviews detected widespread concern amongworkers _using automated-equipment aboutwhat they perceived to be inadequate train-ing, particularly for their present jobs.' Thechief complaints came from equipment oper-ators and skilled trades people at the largecompanies visited. Some of the interest intraining was motivated simply by curiosityabout the new computerized technology. How-ever, most often operators felt that their lackof training in the capabilities of their Machinesmade them less productive workers.

Machinists in the NC shop at the aircraftcompany were the most vocal about theirtraining needs. Although the company spon-sored after-hours courses, the operators re-ported that these classes did not address thespecific capabilities of their Machines. NCoperators were distressed about not knowingmore about their machines; they felt that theycould produce better parts if they were bet-ter versed in the use of their equipment. Onemachinist commented:

It's like having a DC-3 pilot and walkinghim over to a 747 and saying, "Now look guy,it's an airplane, toouse it to the fullestextent it was made for ... and if you don'tknow how to fly it, then check with the guy

213

196 Computerized Mandfacturing Automation: Employment, Ectotation;and the Workplace

in the right seat because he has probablybeen in it before and he will show you howthe ropes work."Some maintenance workers also complained

about-inadequate training. Maintenance per -sonnel are expected to repair increasinglysophisticated and complex electromechanicalequipment, and most of the maintenanceworkers interviewed felt inadequately pr..;pared for this responsibility. Compounding,their sense of inadequacy was the rate of tech:nological change, which could quickly makeeven recently learned systems outdated, andthe pressure they felt to repair the costly andcomplex technology in the minimum possibletime.

Another forCe motivating workers' interestin further training is the fear of displaceinentas more and more jobs are affected by zintorna:tion. The statement of an operator on theFMS, who had bid onto the system partly because of hiS concern about being left behindby changing technology, was typical="If youdon't get into it, you won't be able to get byIf you're looking at 15 years or so before retire-ment, you'll be sweeping floors."

The majority of the managers and maehin=ists interviewed in the small shops belieVedthat training on conventional equipment wasan important prerequisite for effective per-formance on NC equipment. It was not clearwhether they viewed the technical qualities ofNC to be-the principal drawback of learningmachining on NC equipment only , or whethertheir concerns had to do withhow NC machineoperators are often trained (i.e., only on asingle machine;not taught to plan work, setup, etc.). In the small Shops, there were nocomplaints from worker§ about the adequacyof training. This may have been because theemployees did not expect the employer to pro-vide training; or perhaps because there wasmore informal training in small shops; , _

Occupational Safety and Health

The various forms of PA have both positiveand negative effects on the safety and healthof workers. In general, the introduction of PA

tends to have a favorable impact on the workenvironment, although some new physical haz :

ards associated with the lack of immediateworker control over system operations mayemerge. However, PA will create new situa-tions, or perpetuate old ones, that may havenegative psychological effects on the workforce.

Overall, the potential physical hazards ap=pear to be more amenable tosolution thansome of the psychological ones because theyare more easily recognized and are less sub-ject to the subtleties of individual personali-ties. The relief of such symptoms as boredomand stress IS more challenging because theyare_ not as well measured or understood, affectdifferent people in different ways, and areoften complicated by other factors not directlyrelated to the workplace. In addition, a com-mitment to alleviating monotony and stressin the workplace usually involves majorchanges in the way work is structured that canpose problems for both managers and otherworkers. Theseymfety and health considera-tions are discussed below.

Effects of PA on the WorkplaceProgrammable automation has a variety of

implications for health and safety in the work-place. For instance, robots are amenable tohazardous tasks in environments that areunpleasant and unhealthy for human workers.Thus, there, can be a net_positive effect onworkers when a robot is installed for this punpose; 7prOiding the worker displaced is trans-ferred to another job that is more pleasant oris trained to monitor or maintain-the robot.A worker'S lot is considerably improved whenhard or dirty physical labor is assumed by arobot.

However, certain precautions are necessaryto avoid unanticipated encounters between ro=botS and hurnana. Statistics on such encoun-ters in the_United States are presently unavail-able, although the Robotic Industries Associa-tion (formerly the Robot Institute of America)is planning to develop them. A recent Japa-nese Ministry of Labor survey indicated that

214

Ch. 5The Effects of Programmable Automation on the Work Environment 197

in that country, since 1978, there had been 2workers killed, 9 injured, and 37 "narrowescapes"; since near-accidents are not usual-ly reported, the number of such incidents waspresumed to be much higher.'6 As a result, theMinistry of Labor is currently drafting regu-lations dealing with robot safety. These reg-ulations will make it mandatory to: 1) encloserobots with a protective screen or fence, 2)establish operating regulations with fail-safeon-off buttons and possibly auditory signalsindicating the commencement of operation ofmobile robots, and 3) install safety switchesenabling immediate shut-down in case of emer-gency. Also being considered is specializedtraining on the safe operation of robots, as wellas the provision of clearer operating instruc-tions, including visual aids.

In response to concerns about ro fit safety,the Robotic Industries Associatio as orga-nized a committee of robot producers to pro-vide guidelines for the safe use of robots. Inaddition, major robot users in the UnitedStates, such as General Motors, Chrysler, andFord Motor Co., apply their own sets of safe-ty standards (see table 501. The National In-stitute for Occupational Safety and Health(NIOSH) has a ganning project under waythat will examine the potential health and safe-ty problems associated with the introductionof robotics and, define the need for further re-search. NIOSH is also developing guidelines

'" "Microelectronics and Its Impact on Labor," report of theJapanese Ministry of Labor, August 1983.

on sensor-based methods to prevent fatalitiesand traumatic injuries during the maintenanceof automated machines.

A recent report prepared by the British Ma-chine Tool Trades Association described thepotential hazards of robots and developeel amethod of assessing the risks.'7 According tothis report;, the major new hazard is the workenvelope of the robot because it increases thecomplexity of guarding arrangements. Unpr,_dictable action patterns,its ability to move infree space, and the possibility of reconf}gura-tion all distinguish a robot from other/ auto-mated equipment. The report refers to the fol-lowing incidents of unpredicted robot move-ment which have occurred:

aberrant behavior of a robot caused by acontrol system fault,jamming of a servo-valve,robot movement cutting its umbilical '

cord,splitting of a union on an exposed hydrau-lic pipe, and J.fault in data transmission causing a largerthan anticipated movement of the robotarm.

IIn addition, the report discusses recommen-dations on design requirements' and methodsof safeguarding, including safe systems ofwork and rules for access to the robot. Advice

""Sdeguarding Industrial Robotsi Part I, Basic Principles,"a report of the Machine Tool Trades Association, London,England, 1982.

Table 50.GM Robot Safety Standards: Suggested Safeguards

SafeguardsUnauthorized

intrusionMechanical stopsHarriersLockoutLimit detecting hardwareSoftware limitsProximity detectorsPresence detectorsVision optical systemsRobot deactivationSlow speed, low powerExcess-flow check valve (hydraulic fuses)Emergency stop (readily accessible)Warning methods .......

AuthorizedTeach Maintenance

X

Side by side

x.

SOURCE: General Motors Corp., Operations Safety and Health Manual, sec. 28, January 1983.

_

198 Corp)auterized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

on control systems, programing; maintenance,and operation is included; together with a briefsummary of the legal requirements as theycurrently apply in the United Kingdom.

In one manufacturing site visited by OTAstaff, a number of safety precautions for work-intwith an arc-welding robot were observed:*For instance, the robot is programed to workin sequence at two stations, allowing the oper-ator to set up or clear one station while therobot works at the other; Pressure-sensitivefloor pads prevent the robot from working ata station if a person is standing in a risky IOCA-tion. Also, a flashing yellow light indicate§that thp robot is on, and an alarm sounds whenthe robot has finished a task. In order fOr therobot to move from station to station, a relayswitch must be pressed; The opening of a pro-tective chain around the area Will cause a cir-cuit to be broken and the robot will stop.

In the auto company case study; the intro-duction of riabot spot-welding removed autoproduction workers from the point of contactbetween weld gun and sheet :metal; whereshowers of sparks were generated. However,it was generally agreed that the danger of in:jury has escalated for repairmen Who workWith equipment that cannot be pulled to Oneside and replaced by a backup, but must berepaired in place before operation can resume.Dangers stem from the complexity; unfamili-arity, and automatic nature of the new equip-ment that may move without direct humaninitiation and sometimes without warning.The Auto company safety administrator coni-merited:

. . . .In the old days, you had one [weld] gun,and you could shut it down and work on it.Now you've got thiS Complicated mess. If youdon't know what you're doing; you could gethurt. . . . We've had press injuries you didn'thave before, and automatic clamps.

Production workers who were interviewed inthe auto plant belii:'ve that safety is poor inthe automated systeiri. Two problems in par-ticular disturbed thempools of hydraulic oil

*OTA site visit: Emhart Corp.; United Shoe ManufacturingPlant, Beverly, Mass., June /983.

surrounding much of the automated machin:ery and the increased risk of cuts with the to=botic welding system; The union committee=man claimed that the pressure to quickly refillthe conveyors when part of snbassembly suf.fers a breakdown leads to safety hazards:

This [the need to catch up] is areal incen-tive for people to cut corners to" takechances. It's on.a of the reasons we do havea large number of lacerations. : . .

It is important to note in this case that,while breakdowns are techhOlOgital in nature,the pressure to meet quotas in spite of equip-ment failure is organizational. This situationis not unique to PA, hilt the problem is exacer-bated by a systeth designed irri such a way thatequipment cannot be pulled' to one side for re-pair, and by the ccitriplexity/and automatic na-ture of the eqUipment. In addition; the highcapital cost of the equipment increases thedesire to use it to the fullest extent; This mayentail operating the line faster to make up fortime when the machine/is down; in order tomeet production goals4

The potential _safety ,6.C1 health hazards forworkerausing video display terminals (VDTs)for CAD are very different from those forworkers using robots1or other forms of PA,onthe shop floor. Both/the work performed andthe techoOlogy itself are substantially differ-ent. Although there is documentation of in-creased leVels of among clerical workersusing VDTs for lo g periods of time; the prob-lems are lessened /when the terminals are usedes a tool to aunt other activities; as inCAD, and when retain their abtono-my and decisioninaking finktions. Worker§and worker representatives contirine to be con=corned about levels of radiation emitted byVDTs, although evidence to date Suggeststhat the level§ of radiation emitted by VDTsare too low to be hazardous to health." Never-theless; NIOpli is continuing research in,thisarea. eyestrain and postural problems are con-trollable to some extent thrOugl,..properly de-

""Video Displays, Work and Vision," report of the NationalResearch Council (Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press,1983).

216

Ch. 5The Effects of Programmable Automation on the Work Environment 199

signed workstations, lighting, and frequentbreaks._ Based on the technologies observed for theOTA work_enviroru-nent case studies, the fieldrecord of PA with respect to safety appearsto be mixed, which is to be expected with rel-atively new technologies. On the one hand,some types of automation remove productionworkers from close contact with tools duringactual operation. Three different field ex-amples suggest that automation can improvesafety by increasing the distance betweenworkers and the part being machined; assem-bled, or processed: 1) thgintrocluction of robotwelding removes workers from the point ofcontact between the weld gun and sheet metal;2) machinists on NC equipment work at agreater distance from cutting tools and oftenare separated by doors and enclosures; and 3)at the agricultural implements firm, robotsrather than workers now spray-paint tractorsin an atmosphere filled with fumes.

On the other hand, it was noted that auto-mated carriers, clamps, and fixtares move andclose without direct human initiation andsometimes without warning; This can be par-ticularly dangerous where adequate precau-tions are absent and in highly pressured set7.tings, e.g., for maintenance workers who dealwith complex equipment on an assembly orprocessing line that cannot start again untilthey finish repair work. One worker at the agri-

i cultural implements firm noted:I've seen the thing move and nobody

touched a button. Yoteredealing with some-thing you can't control. It's created a wholedifferent type o problemnot necessarilymore problemsbut different problems.

Working around complex machinery that canmove in several different directions accordingto a plan that is not under the control of anoperator or repair person and may not evenbe well understood by those in the immediateareawas mentioned by workers as a signifi-cant safety hazard. The level of complexity onprogrammable systems may make it difficultfor a worker to anticipate the system's behav-ior and avoid the risk presented by sudden and

25-4520 - 84 - 14 QL 3

unpredictable motion. This was demonstratklin 1979 in Michligan when a worker was killedwhen hit in the head by a "robot arm." Theworker was attempting to climb a storage rackto get parts because a materials handling sys-4em designkl to fetch parts automatically hadbeen malfunctioning. Since the arm operatedsilently, the worker was unaware it had re-sumed activity."

Nevertheless; with precautionsthe use of PA will reduce hazards in the work-place; It also will allow new work in hazardousenvironments such as toxic waste handling,nuclear powerplants, and undersea activities.

Psychological Effects of PA on WorkersComputerized automation in manufacturing

has the potential for creating a number of psy-chological impacts on workers; Some of these*effects may represent a temporary phenome-non resulting from a mismatch of worker skillsand job requirements; i.e., experienced work-ers may be either over- or under-qualified forwork they are doing on new automated sys-tems.

Two of the principal effects; boredom andstress; are often closely related in that longperiods of boredom at work can lead to stressin some individuals. In other ways, they rep-resent opposite ends of a spectrum of individ-ual reactions to work responsibilities. Bore-dom and stress in the automated workplace ,can result from the characteristics of the de-sign of the technical system and work orga-nization, as well as from such factors as lotsize and the nature of the product manu-factured.

Boredom,--PA technologies, such as NCmachine tools and flexible manufacturing sys7tems, are usually designed to run with minimaloperator intervention. The human interventionthat is planntd into the system is of a relative-ly routine so7b; such as making tool changesor performing other preventive maintenanceduties. However, in OTA case study inter-

/

19"Millions Paid in Robot Death," Chicago Tribune, Aug. 11,1983.

217

200 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Empioyment,

t

Some types of automation remove production workers frcthe physical effort required to operate them. To pho

--'Bottomnew method, tr:

Ch, 5The Effects of Programmable Automation on the Work Environment 201

views, both the owners of small shops usingNC machines and the project manager of theFMS acknowledged that operator input ofmore than a routine nature; such as being alertto problems and acting to eliminate or mini-mize difficulties that may develop; was impor-tant to the smooth functioning of the produc-tion process; This need for alert and intelligentoperator intervention is at odds with an im-portant aspect of the system's designthe ar.tempt to remove the necessity for. interventionas far is-possibTeirlbWever, some believe thatworkers will always find ways to intervene inautomated pkoCeeSeS.20)

Some NC operators, especially those mak-ing long cuts on NC machines, reported beingbored for significant portions of their_ workingday. NC operators reported that the lethargythat developed from long periods of inactioninterfered with their ability to do their workmost effectively. An NC machine operator atthe aircraft manufacturing company said:

The hardest thing to do is to keep yourselfon your toes checking the measurements.Just because the tape says it's good, it's notnecessarily so . . . you get to relying on thattape, and what the machine can do; and some-times tha boredoinyou know, you'd just assoon put another part on and just sit downagain. 4

The boredom. inherent in running a machinetool that can function automatically foeri-ods of time is exacerbated in some cases by,.long running times for individual parts; so thatthere may be hours and sometimes even daysbetween changeovers when a new setup is re-quired. Parts with long rimming times are par-ticularly common in the aircraft industry, so

' that machinists at the aircraft manufacturerand at the small shops that were subcontractors to the aircraft industry encountered mparts requiring lengthy cuts.4,arge lot sizes,which demand that an operator make the samepart repeatedly, were also a factor in boredom.

-On the FMS, boredom appeared to be lessof a problem for operators; this may have beena function of the broader range of problems

' O'Toole, op. cit.

to which the system was subject. The largthe number and variety of unanticipatevents, the less opportunity there was to bebored \As with NC machine operation, theslower periods when FMS operators appearedto be idle were actually times when they wereoverseeing the system and watching for prob-lems. But it was difficult to sustain alertnessduring these monitoring periods. Boredomcould set in because there was no immediateneed for active intervention and the applica-tion o problem-solving skills. Because opera-tors participated in the diagnosis -and minorrepairs of the costly and complex systems;periods of relative inactivity alternated withperiods of considerable stress and pteseurewl problems arose with the system. Thissituation is similar to a number of other workenvironments that are highly computerized,such as nuclear powerplants.

.

Boredom that resulted from theNway workwas organized was 'a common complaintamong NC operators whomere interviewed forthe case studies; Skilled NC operators who did'not write part progr (i.e., the majority ofthose interviewed) re ed that operating anNC thine was si fi, arttly less interestingan' en g than I -rating a conventionalmac technically possible forNC , a= nists to their own programing,

for _parts, shop floor program-rarely found in the sites visited for the

case studies, either in the small shops or in thelarge NC machke.shop,at the aircraft manu-facturing company. An experienced machinistin one of the small machine shops commented:'You get to be, in my opinion; on an NC; a lit-

tle weak-minded;" Another said; "They'rejunk as far as I'm concerned. . . . You can takea chimpanzee; the-light goes on, push a butr'tom" In the sites visited; only the skilledmachir.dsts who were.able to do some pr am-ing felt positive about NC machining. In tsmall shopsisome relatiVelY inexperienced Noperatbis who had been machinists for o y2 or 3 years reported fewer problenia withboredom, indicating that a worker's previousexperience is an important factor.

219

202 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Emplbyment, Education, and the Workplace

By removing programing from the shopfloor, the most interesting and creative partof NC machining work has been taken out ofthe hands of the machinist. If the equipmentoperator were given-the respASibility fOr de=ciding how to make the part ]to the extent thisis technically feasible and assuming the oper=ator wanted the additiOnal responsibility),boredom would be SubStentially reduced. Amachinist in a small machine shop said:

Flow could you make the job more.intereat-ing? With a machine like this jan NC lathe],get a good operator who knows what he's do7ing, ....give him a chance to do a setup andleain howl() program the machine, so thathe can look at the readout, and he can under-stand what the machine is doing, not juststand here and just wait and then push thebutton and take the part outthat wouldhelp for a while.

In some settings, however, programing orediting on the shop floor may be unavoidablyconstrained. In defense applications, for exam-ple, NC programs may be certified by the De-partment of Defense, a situation that 'militatesagainst ad hoc changes by machinists.

Stress.As in many workplaces, work-re-lated stress is a significant feature of compuTter-automated workplaces. Evidence from theOTAmork environment case studies suggeststhat for many workers stress is an importantfactor in the work environment, particularlyfor employees who have. responsibility_ for verycomplex and expensive systems; Two majorsources of automation-related stress were iden-tified: 1) stress associated with working onvery complicated, capital-intensive, and highlyintegrated systems; and 2) the lack of auton=omy at work, extending in some cases to tom=puterized monitoring by management. Inmany cases, stress may be considered a tem:,porary byproduct of the change .process itself;in others; it may become a permanent featureof the work environment. ,

In the plants studied; maintenance workersand equipment operators who had some main-tenance duties reported subStantial stressassociated with having the responsibility for

maintaining sophisticated,-costly, and inter-dependent automated systems such as the ro=botic welding system at the auto plant or thematerials handling system at the agriculturalimplements manufacturer. The combination ofthe complexity of the system and the pressureto minimize downtime_ because of the high costof lost production added up to substantialstress for some maintenance workers assignedto systems of this sorta problem intertwinedwith but also distinct from the physical haz-ards that such stress produces.

The most vivid example of this type ofstress was in the body shop of the automaker,where welder repair supervisors reported be-ing under extreme pressure. In the area of thebody shop where the side aperture roboticwelding/automotic re-spot line is located, therehad been a 150 percent annual rateamong first-line supervisors. A generaf fore-man said:

This has been the hardest 3 years of my life.There isn't any relaxation ... I've walked outof here and sat in my car, unable to move, get-ting myself together.

The highly integrated nature of the automatedframing system; which links in series complexelectronic and mechanical components, meansthat a failure in one part of the system spreadsquickly to other areas.

The high cost of the equipment in the auto-,mated body shop is a further source of stress.Thousands of dollars worth of damage may bedone if a supervisor, in haste; misdiagnoses aproblem. The same problem was mentioned inregard to the FMS of the tractor prodUCer. Asone operator put it:

When you're first down there; you're justnervous. Because everything's so expensiveyou don't want to break anything.

Another source of stress for workers onautomated systems comes from system unpre-dictability. Computerized automation, as aneledtriCian at the tractor assembly plant said;"is made to go and stop on its own program."A machinist at a small machine shop made a

220

Ch. 5The Effects of Programmable Automation on the Work Environment 203

similar comment about working on NC ma-chine tools:

These NC machinesthey're unpredicta-ble; You don't know what it's going to do, thefirst time you run that program. You're al-ways on edge until it's proved out.The reduction in autonomy at work can take

its toll in stress on the worker. In all of thework sites visited for -the case studies, man-agers spoke about using PA to establish bet-ter plaimittg and allocation of all the firm'sresources. A frequently mentioned benefit inbatch production was faster throughput, theability to complete the production of apart inless time, as a result of more effective &rec-

., tion of the part's movement through the shop.The particular organizational choices manag-ers made to establish greater control resultedin less autonomy for the workers involved. Ingeneral, reduction in amount of autonomy onthe job is likely to be more stressful whereworkers previously had a greater degree of au-tonomy and now have either less or none atall. It also would be different in degree depend-ing on the experience and expectations of theindividual worker;

Analyzing studies of Swedish and Americanmen, Dr. Robert A. Karasek found that work-related strain was a function not of heavy jobdemands alone, but of the combination ofheavy job demands with restricted job controland decisionmaking latitude.2' He concludes:

. . . the opportunity for a worker to use hisskills and to make decisions about his workactivity is associated with reduced symp-toms (of stress) at every level of job demands.We do not find, therefore, support for the be-lief that most individuals "overburdened"with decisions face the most strain in an in-dustnabzed economy. Literature lamentingthe stressful burden of executive decision-making misses the mark. Constraints on deci-sionmaking, not decisionmaking per se, arethe major problem, and this problem affects,not only executives but workers in low statusjobs with little freedom for decisionmaking

"Robert A. Karasek; Jr., "Job Demand_ s, Job Decision Lati-tude, and Mental StrWu Implications for Job Redesign," Ad-ministrabve Science Quarterly (24), June 1979, p. 303.

. . . e.g., assembly workers, garment stitch-ers, freight-and-materials handlers, nurse'saides. and orderlies, and telephone operators.

Machine-paced work, such as was found atthe agricultural implements company and_atthe auto manufacturer, affects autonomy. As-sembly workers at both companies were pacedby the speed of the line, so that both the rateof their work and the timing of their breakswere out of their control (and also unpredict-able, in the case of downtime). Lack of auton-omy iazot, of course, a new issue on the shopfloor; it is not easily alleviated, and may in-deed be aggravated, by the introduction of-

' PA.The increased visibility of shop operations

made possible by computerized monitoringand scheduling systems allows managementto spot bottlenecks more readily and take cor-rective action when necessary. However, whatinformation is gathered and how it is used canresult in new forms of control, both subtle anddirect, over worker activities. Electronicmonitoring of worker performance; and the ap-prehension it engenders in workers, can alsoadd to stress in the workplace?

One system observed in the site visit to theaircraft manufacturer monitored productionat 66 NC machines that are directly wired intothe system. The goal is to establish direct feed-back from the shop floor to management abouthow an important element of the NC programthe control of machine feeds-I-is carried out.The system and a panel that shows the statusof each machinerunning, running at lessthan 80 percent, down ..or temporarily haltedfor part handlingis housed above the shopfloor in a control room with a view of the sur-rounding machines. By looking at a panel, asupervisor can tell the status of all the ma-chines in a given jurisdiction. Moreover, super-visors obtain daily reports from the system;and weekly and monthly tabulations are madein chart form for upper management.

The system seems to be widely accepted,even though some operators are apprehensiveabout its monitoring capabilities. (One machin-ist said: "It's like having a big television cam-

221

203 Computerc.'eti Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education; and the Workplace

era loo ng over my shoulder,") One of thereason it has been accepted is that certainlimits on its use by management are fairly wellestablished after several year of operation.The company has an agreement with the unionthat information from the system will not beused to discipline employeeS, although oper-ators said that individual supervisors could ex-ercise various _sorts of informal discipline ifthey so chose, Monitoring, which is not a newissue on the shop floor, was also emerging asan issue among engineers at the company be-cause of the potential use of CAD terminalsfor-Monitoring the amount of time spent at theterminals by individual engineers. The capa-bilities of the technology are thus expandingthe _concerns about computer monitoring intohigher levels of the organization, affecting per-sonnel who lack prior experience with or cop=ing mechanisms for it.

Labor-Management RelationsThe effects of PA on the work environment

will be determined in part by management'smotivations for automating and by the natureof labor-management relations.* Managementmight decide to introduce PA for a variety ofreasons, such as 1) to improve productivity,2) to reduce costs, 3) to standardize produc-tion methods, 4) to enable the use of workerswith fewer skills, 5) to increase control overthe pace and quality of production, and 6) toget on the technological bandwagon. Whomakes the decision in the organization will alsohave an important effect on the results. Re-search suggests that managers_ often lack thebackground to assess the technological op-tions, while taff familiar with the new tech-nologies are le le to appreciate associatedstrategic dimension-S."

This discussion focuses on work environment issues; it ex-cludes wages; benefits, and other industrial relatidins issues. Foradditional discussion; see OTA Technical Memorandliin "Au-tomation and the Workplace: Selected Labor, Education, andTraining Issues," March 1983.

"Stephen R. Rosenthal and Homayciiin Vossoughi; "FactoryAutomation in the U.S.: Summary of SurveY Responses andinitial Commentaries; School of Management, Boston Univer-sity, March 1983.

Once the decision is made, the strategiesemployed by management for introducing PAare key in determining its impacts. Prior ex-perience seems to be an important factor inhow an organization copes with additionalautomation." AlSo, the introduction of newtechnology may be facilitated by good intra-company communications and a "par-ticipative" management style." Where theknowledge and exp-ertise of workers is factoredinto the deciSionmaking surrounding new tech-nology, and information is shared, implemen-tation problems may be minimized somewhat.In the agricultural implements case study,when asked what he would do differently,given another opportunity, the plant'smanager of manufacturing replied:

We would bring in the electrical and me-chanical Skilled trades people earlier so theycould see the equipment installed: ... Wewould have our own skilled tradespeople lookover the shoulder of the installers:::: Wewould also have brought in more systemspeople earlier, especially systems people withshop savvy.

Cooperative arrangements between universi-ties and manufacturing firms may be usefuldevices forintroducing new technologies. Forexample, WorceSter Polythnic Institute andthe Emhart Corp. joined together to form anon- campus research center to work on prac-tical applications problems involved in in-troducing robotic systems to Emhart's oper-ating divisions. 25 Relevant personnel at alllevels (production, support, and professional)participated in applications development andpreparation.

Thenature of labor-management relationswill affect the implementation of new technol-ogy and its consequences for the work environ-ment. Cooperation between employers, work-ers, and society in determining the design, im-plementation, and pace of change would tendto minimize potential negative effects of tech=

"Donald Gerwin, "Do'S and Don'Us of Computerized Manufac-turing,"Harvard Business Rein-6W, March-April 1982; p. 110.

"The Impact of Chip Technology, op. cit., p. 8."OTA Education and Training case study.

222

Ch. 5The Effects of Programmable Automation on the Work Env, mment 205

nological innovation." Such cooperation, how-ever, willrequire mutual trust among the par-ties involved. While such trust traditionallyhas not been a hallmark of labor-managementrelations in the United States, some observerspredict that American industrial relations willbecome more hospitable to collaboration in thenear future due to such pervasive circum-stances as intense foreign competition andtechnological change.

In response to changing worker expecta-tions, management increasingly has beenforced to pay greater attention to the needsof its work force, beyond the traditional onesof fair wages and benefits. This trend has beengrowing since the 1960's and 1970's, andis notlimited to either new technology or PA. In ad-dition to such provisions as profit-sharing andjob security, workers have been demanding agreater say in matters that directly affect theirworkplace; where management has begun totap into this knowledge and experience theyhave often discovered a new source of supportand insights. -

The attention being given in the UnitedStates to the Japanese style of labor-manage-ment relations seems to be affecting the natureof labor-management relations in this country.In particular, cooperative labor-managementefforts in solving workplace problems havebeen gaining popularity in the United States.These innovative work experiments are knownby a variety of names, including Quality ofWorking Life Programs, Quality Circles, La-bor/Management Committees, and EmployeeInvolvement Programs. A recent Departmentof Labor document identifies and describesover 200 cooperative labor-management pro-grams;" the International Association of Qual-ity Circles promotes quality circles throughconferences, training activities, and educa-tional materials; and consulting firms are be-

' "Donald Kennedy, Charles Craypo, and Mary Lehman (eds.),Labor and Technology: Union Response to Changing Environ-ments (Department of Labor Studies, The Pennsylvania StateUniversity, 1982).

""Resource Guide to Labor-Management Cooperation," U.S.Department of Labor, Labor-Management &rvices Adminis-tration, October 1983.

ginning to provide guidance for setting upsuch efforts. Membership in participative pro-grams is usually voluntary, and training inproblem-solving techniques is provided. Gen-erally, their purpose is to identify and help tosolve everyday problems on the job. Such pro-grams have had mined results, reflecting thediversity of approaches taken, managementstyles, and work force heterogeneity. Thismakes it difficult to generalize about the goalsof these programs or to evaluate their effec-tiveness.

Cooperative efforts can occur in either unionor nonunion settings. Indeed, their presencein nonunion settings is attributed by some asa factor constraining further unionization. Inplants that are unionized, cooperative groupsusually deal with workplace issues that falloutside the collective bargaining framework.Quality circles, modeled after_ the quality con-trol circles in Japan, are usually management-initiated to improve product quality and pro-ductivity. For this reason, some unions viewthem as management devices to increase pro-ductivity at the expense of workers, and some-times as a way to fight unions, rather than asefforts to increase worker participation. Thefragility of some quality of work life (QWL)programs has been demonstrated recentlywhen UAW union locals in GM plants in bothMichigan and California called for either dis-bandment or reevaluation of QWL programs,criticizing management for abusing the coop-erative spirit of the programs.

In the case of the introduction of new tech:nology, successful labor-management cooper=ative efforts should have a positive effect onthe way in which it is perceived in the work-place. For instance, the UAW-Ford EmployeInvolvement Program is viewed by employeesas having a beneficial effect on their jobs andthe work environrnent.28 Where such programsare functioning well, they could help to easethe changes brought about by the introduC-

""11A-W=F6rzrEififiloye Involvement: A Special Survey Re-' port," Center Report 1, UAW-Ford National Development and

Training Center, 1982.

223

206 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

tion of PA. The pri. ,a1 uncertainty aur-rounding such programs appears to be, how-ever, their relationship to the perhaps morefundamental issue of job security. Labor -man-agement cooperation appears to be sounderwhere the fact of jobs is not in question.

If PA is perceived to be a growing threat tojob security, that perception may interferewith other labor-management cooperative pro-grams. Other factors that may hinder newjoint programs are the reluctance of partiesto fundamentally revise their attitudes; eider=nil events such as a recession; and lack Of Com-mitment by one or the other party." Some ex-pert§ believe that shifts in labor-managementrelations in recent times have been the resultof recession and do not represent any funda-mental change in the attitudes of either man-agernent Or labor.3° The tenor otnegotiatiOnsin major collective bargaining to take place in1984 and beyond will bear watching to See ifthere are perceptible treads in A Changing ell=Mate of labor-management relations.

The latest Bureau of Labor StatistiCa data(September 1981) give the number Of employedwage and salary workers in labor organza=tiona as 23 percent and the percentage repre-sented by labor organiZations as 25.7 percent,although the_proportion varies among indus-tries (see table 51).3' Experts suggest thatthese percentages are currently a few pointslower. The approaches to new technology andaccomj,anying levels Of concern have variedamong unions; although overall concern isgrowing. While the yieW§ of unionized workersconcerning new technolOgy are known; less isknown about the attitudes of workers in non,unionized companiea. However, they wouldlikely cover a broad range depending on thesize of the company and the type of labor p61-_icies employed. One study found that some of-

"Irving H. Siegel arid Edgar Weinberg, Labor-ManagementCooperaUnn: The American ExperiencelKalamazon: W. E. Up-john Institute for Employment Research, 1982).

' "Sar A. Levitan and Clifford M. Johnson, "Labor and Man-agement: The Illusion of Cooperation," Harvard Business Re-viewSeptember-Oa66er 1989,p. 8.

"Earnings and Other_ Characteristics of Organized Work=ers," U.S. Department of Labor; Bureau of Labor Statistics,September 1981.

the large nonunion companies resembled thelarge unionized companies in their labor prac-tices, and some even had policies that weremore restrictive than those of union contrac-tual arrangements." In the small nonunionshops visited for OTA work environment casestudies, workers interviewed seemed to acceptthe fact that the future lies in increasingautomation, whether or not they like itpersonally.

Unions have attempted to minimize whatare perceived as the socially harmful effectsof new technologies on-the-labor force, suchas job displacement and deskilling. Such et=forts include collective bargaining, organizing,and political strategies." For instance, tech-nology clauses are becoming more, common incollective bargaining agreements, and someunions provide model contract language totheir local bodies that covers the introductionof new technology. Adjustment proceduresand prograMs, such as advance notice and pro-visions for training related to new technology,increasingly are included in union contracts.Recently AT&T and the local operating com-panies that were aptiri-off in January 1984agreed to offer retraining for other companyjobs at company expense, and thus job security, to any worker whose job will be eliMinatedby the introduction of new technology.

The International Association of Machinistsand Aerospace Workers' Technology Bill ofRights, which outlines a specific list of workerrights with respect to the introduction of newtechnologies, has been provided to local unionsas a guide to be used during contract negotia-tions (see table 52). However, in a recent con-tract negotiation in California the company ig-nored the union request for one of the itemslisted on the Bill of Rightsthe retraining ofworkers whose jobs are eliminated because ofnew technology:34

'Jack Stieber, Robert B. Mckersie, and D. Quinn Mills (Ws.),Industry Relations 1950-1960: A Critical Aseeaainent

(Madison, Wis.: Industi& Relations Research Association,1981), from chapter entitled "Large Noriumionkzed Employers"by Fred K. Foulkes.

"Kermedy, Craypo, and Lehman, op. cit.""Machinists Clem. Pact With McDonnell Bolstering Firm'S

Tough Stand on Costs," Wall Street Journal, Nov. 8, 1983.

Table 51.-Employed Wage and Salary Workers Represented by Labor Organizationsa by Occupation and Industry, May 1980(numbers In thousands)

ilOatieri_a_Critrerit4Ob_ Total

Transportationarid puriiic Wholesale Finance and Forestry and Public

onctriolinn Manutarfurmg otiiihes trade Retail trade services fisheries administration

Percent of employed wage and salary workers

fccupationsbtecollar occupations... .......clessional, technical. and kindred workers .anagers and administrators, except farm .

erica! and kindred workers .

Iles workers

-collar workers'aft and kindred workersCarpenters ,,,,Construction craftworkers.-except carpenters . .

Mechanics and repairers. .

leratives and kindred workersOperatives.. except transportDrivers and delivery workers .

Other transport equipment operatives.antarm laborers .

Construction.Manulacturing_All other dontar-mlabcrerS .

ice workers, including private household...

25.7 3.8 35.2 33.1 34.8 59.5 12.6 10.5 19.7 16.1 40.5 .18.5 2.7 10.2 12.2 12.3 38.4 4.6 8.5 20.5 (c) 36.3 cri.27.7 (c) 6.5 19.4 11.3 33.8 4.1 6.4 32.4 . (c) 31.3 L9.7 (c) (c) 12.7 5.9 16.9 3.9 6.1 10.1 (c) 26.2 .-1

19.2 (c) 16.7 8.2 18.2 49.2 7.8 13.9 11.2 (c) 42.6 0---co

5.0 i (c) (C) (c) 5.4 (c) 2.2 5.4 4.4 - (c).41.4 8.1 47.1 39.6 46.9 62.6 28.9 21.3 20.6 (C) 91.0 1:13

41.2 (C) 51.0 41.1 45.8 67.7 21.8 12.9 23.2 (0 450 0-; ,

33.9 (C) (6) 31.3 42.7 (C) (2) (6) (C) (C) (C)

a-50:4 (C) (C) 46:4 67:6 70:3 _to__ Jo_ 40:7 (c) (c) ...13

92:9 (c) Icy 39.3 57:1 66:0 16:8 10:8 21:1 (c) 46.2 0..93:5 (c) 92:7 39.6 1 96:9 57:0 36:1 22:6 22:3 - 41,4 co

42.4 (C) 4.1,1 39.9 96:1 60:9 33:7 22.4 20.0 (C) i43.0 (C.) (2) 39.9 45.6 53.2 17.4 213 2.6.6 (C) a68:2 --. (c) .(c)_ 69.8 88.3 _lc 1_ Acl. _(c)_ Icy g35.1 7.5 (c) 34.4 52.2 64.8 24.1 28.9 13.2 (c) 32.5 ir34.4 - - 34.4 - - - - . - br.52.2 - 52.2 - - - e29.7 7.5 (c) - - 64.8 24.1 28.9 13.2 (c) 32.5 cb.

18.4 (c) (c) (c1 36.5 -60.1. (c) 5.8 17.0 (6( 55 0 aides members and nonmembers in bargaining units.ades lam workers not shown seproaktlya less than 75,55g.

Due to rounding. sums of individual items may not equal totals. Dashes (-) indicate no workers in cell.

;ROE: Bureau of Labor Statistics. "Earnings and Other Characteristics of Organized Workers, May 1980," Bulletin 2105, September 1981, p. 27.

20a Computerized MandlabtUring Automation: Employment, Education; and the Workplace

Table U.Workers' Technology Bill of Rights

I. New Technology shall be used in a way that creates jobsand nromotes community-wide and national full employ-ment.

II. Unit Labor Cost savings and lab& productivity gainsresulting from the use of New TechnOlogy shall beShared with workers at the local enterprise level and shallnot be permitted to accrue excessively or exclusively forthe gain of capital, management, and shareholders.

III. Local communities, the states and the nation haVe a rightto require employers to pay _a replacement tax, on allmachinery, equipment, robots; and production_systemsthat workers, cause unemployment and; therebydecrease local,_ state, and federal revenues.

IV. New Technology shall improve the conditions of workand enhance and "expand the opportunities forknowledge, skillS, and compensation of workers. Dis-placed workers shall be entitled to training; retrainingand subsequent job placement or re-employment.

V. New Technology shall be used to develop and strength-en the U.S. industrial base; consistent with the FullEmployment goal and national security requirements;before it is licensed or otherwise exported abroad:_

VI. New Technology shall be evaluated in terms of workersafety and health and shall not be destructive of theworkplace environment, nor shall it be used at the ex-pense of the community's natural environment:

VII. Workers; through their trade Unions and bargaining units,shall have an absolute right to participate in all phasesof management deliberations and decisions that lead or

,could lead to the intrOdUttiOn of new technology or the-hanging_ of the workplace system deSigh, work proc-esses and procedures for doing work, including the shut-down or transfer of work; capital; plant and equipment.

VIII. Workers shall have the right to monitor control_ roomcenters and control stations and the new technologyshall not be used to monitor, measuro or Otherwige con-trol the work practices and work standards of individualworkers, at the point of work.

IX. Storage of an individual worker's personal data and in-formation file by the employer shall be tightly controlledand the collection andfor release and dissemination ofinformation with respect to race; religious or, politicalactivities and beliefs, records of physical and mentalhealth disorders and treaterierita; records of arrests andfelony charges or convictions, ihfOrrhation concerningsexual preferences and conduct, information concern-ing internal and private family matters; and informationregarding an individual's financial condition or creditworthiness shall not be permitted, except In _rare cir-cumstances_related to health, and. then only after con-sultation with a family or union-appointed physician,psychiatrist or member of the clergy, the right of an in-dividual worker to inspect hiS or her personal data fileshall at all times be absolute and open.

X. When New Technology is employed in the prOductibnof military goods and service% workers;_through theirtrade union and bargaining agent; shall have a right tobargain with management over the establishment ofAlternative_Production Committee% WhiCh shall designways to adopt that technology to socially-useful produc-tion and products in the civilian sector of the economy.

SOURCE: International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers.

226

One of the most controversial subjects oflabor-management relations involving the in-troduction of new technology will be workrules. Work rules are central to the collec-tive bargaining system in the United States,and are viewed by some as one of its greatstrengths.36 This system of job control is alsoclosely related to the tenets of Taylorisrn thatbreak down work into sets of discrete tasks."In work sites that are becoming more andmore automated, management is likely to de-mand increasing flexibility in deploying work-ers. As noted in chapter 4, successful imple-mentation of PA may involve subStantialchanges in production processeS and in thenature of work to be done by people as Op-posed to machines. These changeS will raise,questions concerning job definitionaboutwhich tasks are combined to make which jobs.Work rulei assure that certain jobs containcertain tasks, but PA may make such jobs ob-solete. Job definition changes may be reflectedin collective bargaining requests from manage-ment for relating and changing work rules, inreturn for union demands for worker benefitssuch as job security or profit-sharing. In this

ablerespect, nonunion, Shops may be able to re-spond more quickly to the changing workplacedemands of new technology.

Any discussion of restructuringwork in au-tomated environments in ways .that would en-hance the workplace needs to be framed in thecontext of how the work rule-issue evolves.Management'S ability to take innovative ap-proaches to implementing PA may be con-strained by work rules that are outmodedanddifficult to change. In return for increased flex-ibility in deploying workers, management mayneed to be more responsive in such matters asincreased labor involvement in decisions con-cerning the implementation of new technologyor job security.

"Robert M. Kaus; "The Trouble With Unions, Harper's.June 1983, p. 29.

"Michael J. Piore, "AmeriCan Labor and the Industrial Cri-sis," Challenge. March-April 1982, P. 9.

Ch. 5The Effects of Programmable Automation on the Work Environment 209

European and Japanese ExperiencesIn Western Europe and Japan, mechanisms

for _dealing with workplace concerns have gen-erally been apPlied to the introduction of newtechnology, and in many cases the laws specifyhow such introduction is to be handled. Forexample, the laws of West Germany, Norway,and Sweden provide for worker involvementin technology issues, and labor is routinely rep-resented on corporate boards. It is important,however, to point out that the culture and tra-ditions of Europe and Japan regarding atti-tudes and practices in the workplace differfrom the those of the United States, especial-ly in the area of labor-management relations.In general, the labor-management relations ofthese countries are characterized by a morecooperative atmosphere and greater workerparticipation than has been the case in theUnited States.

JapanThere seems to be a broad consensus among

labor, management, scholars, and the govern-ment in Japan that new technologies shouldbe applied in ways that will humanize life andthe quality of work.37 For example, in 1983,a joint effort of government, industry, andacademia began to develop robots to performjobs too hazardous or unhealthy for human be-ings (known as "extreme-job" robots)."

Much has been written about Japanesemanagement style and its effect on the workenvironment. In particular, the nature of labor-management relations provides many oppor-tunities for information exchange and sharing,both between management and labamong workers themselves.39 Such intion-sharing is key in Japanese companies, and

"Kazutoshi Koshiro, "The Employment Effect of Microelec-tronic Technology," Highlights in Japanese Industrial Rela-tions, The Japanese Institute of Labor 1983, p. 87.

""GoV'tIndustry Project WU:1St-at On- 'Extreme-Job' Ro-bota," The JapaneSe Economic Journal, Mar. 8, 1983, p. 10.

"flaruo Shimada, "Japanese Postwar Industrial Growth andLabor-Management Ftelations," paper presented at the 35th An-nual Meeting of American Industrial Relations Association;December 1982, p. 7.

provides the basis for quality circles at firm;plant, and workshop levels. It is also effectivein the introduction and use of new technologiessuch as PA.

There are two principal types of worker par-ticipation in Japan that exist primarily in theprivate sector: 1) direct shop floor participa-tion, such as small group participative activi-ties like quality control circles; and 2) indirectrepresentational forms, such as labor-manage-ment consultation systems. 40 Small productionstudy groups have played a vital role in de-veloping employee participation in problem -solving: Unions and quality control circleshave often been involved in designing robotapplications within the plants. Those compa=nies with the most active quality control cir=des have also been the leaders in the use ofrobots:1

Participatory work structures represent oneof a number of actions designed to dealthe effects of labor shortages in Japan.47 Thwere usually introduced as part of a corporatestrategy to make firms more attractive tohighly educated potential recruits and toreduce the likelihood of turnover and laborunrest. Thus, worker participation originallywas more an obligation of each employee thanan opportunity to actively participate in solv-ing workplace problems.

Quality control circles often provide a goodopportunity to promote "humanization ofwork" in the workplace." Workers are taughtfairly simple statistical quality control tech-niques anclmodes of Problem-solving. They areguided by leaders, often foremen, in the selec-

"Robert E. Cole; "Participation and Control in Japanese In-dustry," prepared for Conference on Productivity; Ownershipand Participation, Agency for International DeVelopment, U.S.Department of Labor, May 1983.

"Paul H. Aron, "Robotics in Japan: Past, Present, Future,"a presentation to Robots VI Conference; March 1982, p. 4.

"Cole, op. cit."TakeShi Inagami, "QC Circle Activitiei and the Suggestion

System," Highlights in Japanese Industrial Relations, The Jap---anese Institute of Labour; 1983; p. 67.

210 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

tion and solving of job-related quality problems.

The second type of worker participation isthe labor-management consultation system, arepresentational form of participation byunion officials on behalf of employees in whichemployers and employees discuss manage-ment policies and plans." The focus is on im-proving communications between manage-ment and labor, improving working condi-tions, and stabilizing labor relation& Joint con-sultation provides a framework in which ne-gotiations on working conditions_ can be con-ducted on a continuous basis rather than asa focus of collective bargaining. Participantsdo not view them as providing the primary ba-sis for increased worker participation in man-agement;

While popular accounts of Japztnese labor-management relations highlight labor's input;on closer inspection it can be seen that man-agerial control is strong. Matters relating tothe operation of thefirm; production; and per-sonnel are most often settled by company no-tification or explanation." Management re-tains its prerogative to act unilaterally butwhere possible; uses the joint consultation sys-tem to solicit worker and union opinion. Man-agement carefully controls and guides the ac-tivities of small group participatory activities,and would resist more direct threats to its pre-rogatives that might be tried through legis-lative Means. This system is facilitated bya relatively high level of homogeneity in theJapanese population and labor forceC1-

The Japanese system offers several adVanltages relative to the introduction of new tech-nology. Generally, where new technology is in-troduced workers are reassigned rather thanlaid off. However; there are signs that thisJapanese practice, which in the past has beenan understanding and not contractual in na-ture, may be changing (see ch. 4). Recentlythere has been evidence that Japanese work -ers are becoming more concerned about theimpact Of new technology on employment.

"Cole. op. cit.

"Ibid.

Unions have begun to win agreements aimedat protecting workers against the potentialnegative effects of automation.

For example, Nissan Motor Co._ and autoworkers have negotiated what is likely to be-come a model technology agreement for otherunions. It requires "consultation" betweenlabor and management before the introductionof labor-saving automation and prohibits thecompany from dismissing or laying off work-ers bgcause of new technology. Nissan prom-ises not to downgrade positions or reducewages and working conditions, and agrees toprovide union members with necessary educa-tion and training to facilitate adjustment, inaccordance with their aptitude and ability. Thefact that this is a written agreement ratherthan a tacit understanding makes this con-tract important and unique in Japan.

While quality control circleS are widely usedin Japan; it is interesting to note that the Jap-anese companies operating in the UnitedStates have been much more cautious aboutinstituting Such mechanisms because of dif-ferencea in the work environment and a muchmore heterogeneous work force. Where suchpractice8 are instituted, they are usually in-troduced very gradually to allow time forworkers to adjust to the information-sharingand to learn the problem-solving techniquesof quality circles. The Nissan truck plant inSmyrna, Tenn., which opened in 1983, will bewatched carefully as an experiment in Japa-nese management applied to an Americanworkforce: Early reports give it high marks,but some observers suggest that it is too earlyto evaluate how well it will work over time.

Norway and Sweden

There are several Scandinavian attempts toensure worker involvement in anticipating andcontrolling the effects of new technologies onthe workplace.

In both Norway and Sweden, workplace leg-islation is in effect and Workers are repre-sented on corporate boards.

In Norway; the unions, employers,_ and thestate have tried to shape the actual direction

22j

Ch. 5The Effects of Programmable Automation on the Work Environment 211

of technological change.47 The 1977 WorkingEnvironment Act gave workers the right ofadvance notice of all proposed technologicalchanges, access to company data banks, andparticipation in all decisions that affect theform and content of their jobs."

Legislation has specified conditions to theextent of mandating efforts to avoid undiver-sified, repetitive work and work that is gov-erned by machine or conveyor belt in such amanner that the employees themselves areprevented from varying the speed of the work.Otherwise "efforts shall be made to arrangethe work so as to provide possibilities for var-iation and for contact with others, for connec-tion hetween individual job assignments, andfor employees to keep themselves informedabout production requirements and results."

Technology agreements negotiated by laborand management also affect the ability ofworkers to influence the direction of workplacetechnologicatchange.5° They establish a vari-ety of rights for workers in the areas of infor-mation, training, participation, and bargain-

__ing_concerning-technology-related matters in .

the workplace. Workers are guaranteed bothjob-related training and general educationabout technical systems and their design.

In Sweden, two laws protectemployees inrelation _to workplace changes. The first is theAct on Employee Participation in Decision-making (1977), which obliges the employer toinform and negotiate with the union beforemaking decisions on any major operationalchanges, including implementation of newtechnology.5' The second law, the Swedish

"Leslie Schneider, "Technology Bargahung in Norway," pre-pared for the Ministry of Local Government and Labor, Oslo,Norway; March 1983,

"Robert Howard, "Brave New orkplace," Working Papersfor a New Society. vol. 7, November-December 1980, p. 28.

"Act of 4 February 1977 relating to Worker Protection andWorking Environment; as subsequently amended last by Actof 13 June 1980; Directorate of Labour Inspection; Oslo; Nor-way, Novemlier 1980.

5°Schneider, op. cit."Kerstin Norrby and*Burbara Klockare,The Swedish Agen-

cy for Aditrinistrative Development , "Decision-making, Assess-ment of Effects and Participation Regarding Computerizatiorr -hi the Swedish Governmental Administration," a paper to theConference on System Design, IFIP Working Group, &ptember1982.

Work Environment Act of 1978, sets out gen-eral demands that can be made with regardto working conditions. It includes basic ruleson both the physical and the psychologicalwork environment. An essential point is thatemployees are to have an opportunity to in-fluence the design of the work environment.The focus is on the working premises, equip-ment, techniques, and working methods. Bothlaws are supplemented by collective agree-ments between employers and employees.

In addition to work environment laws, in-dications are that the Swedish Government iscommitted to research in how changing tech-nologies affect workers." The pivotal researchinstitution in the work environment field inSweden is the research department of theNational Board of Occupational Safety andHealth. A large proportion of total funds al-located for work environment research in Swe-den is awarded by The Swedish Work Envi-ronment Fund. Founded in 1972 and financedby means of a payroll tax levied on all employ-ers; the Fund supports research al* develop-ment; training; and information to improve thework environment in a broad sense; includingco-determination (requirement that employersnegotiate with unions on any plans for majorchanges in company activities), psychosocialwork environment problems, and work orga-nization."

The Swedish Centre for Working Life is anindependent research institute supported bythe Ir nd and the government. It focuses onrese ch problems concerned with individualsand oups in working life, industrial relations,co-d termination, the organization of work,and 'ts mode of operation.

A recent summary of considerations andpro osals_put forth by the Swedish Commis-sion on the Effects of Computerization on Em-ployment and Working Environment, pub-liged in April 1981, states:

52 ennis Charnot and Michael D. Dymmel,"Cooperation orCon t: European Experiencea With Technological_ Change at,

'the Workplace a publication -of the DepartrileiitAr_ Profes-Employees, AFL-CIO, WaShirigt;dri,

55 'Programme of Activities and Budget 1981.82-1983-84,"Swdish Work Environment Fund; 1982.

E 229

212 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Emphiyment, Edo Cation; and the Workplace

It goes without saying that the Commis-sion holds the view that allpossibilities to in-fluence how computer technology is usedshould be fully exploited."

This includes the use of industrial robots toeliminate heavy, monotonous, restrained jobsand jobs that are hazardous to health. TheCommission also concluded that an increasein the use of computer technology in manufac-turing processes increases isolation at work.It endorsed new technology if its use includesboth an effort to create a better working en-vironment and co=determination exercised byemployees.

West GerthanyIn West Germany; research in the areas of

humanization of _work and co-determinationare Considered to be_ CloSely related.55 The gov-ernment has funded_Work humanization proj-ects since 1974; inChidirig safety and healthand work reorganization. Germany's co-deter-xnination law requires that workers be rere-sented by an elected works council that workswith management on productivity and otherissues. tiotkreVer, the extent to which ordMaryemployees have input to the works councilsis questionable." German managers are legallyobligated to negotiate all major decisions atthe plant level with the work councils and sub-Mit the outcome to the supervisory boards(equivalent to American boards of directors).According to a recent analysis; "Their [Ger=man] commitment to technological expertise,enduring customer relationships, long-termresults; and the achievement of consensusleads most successful German companies towork closely with their in integrat-ing new technology with the capabilities of thework force."67

"From a summary of considerations and tir6poSals,Put for-1;.Mrd by the Swedish Commission on the Effects of Computei-ization on Employment and Working Environment in its report"Computerization in IndUStry--Effects on Employment andWorking Environment," April 1981.

"Chamot and Dymxnel, op. cit.'4"Mb.cring Beyond the Assembly Lines,"Business Week, July

27, 1981, p. 87."Joseph A. Limprecht and Robert H. Hayes; "Germany's

World-Clais Manufacturers," Harvard Business Review;November-December 1982, p. 142.

During the 1960's, the social implicationsof increasing automation and rationalizationMeasures fueled the delitite-OVirth-Creform ofworking conditioria. In addition to the preven-.Lion of accidents and occupational diseases,the improvernerit of workingconditions beganto include, for example, ergonomic workplace

; and machine design, as well as new forms of1 organization of *rot* permitting greater indi,vidual responsibility and more opportunities

/ for acquiring qualifications.These activities gave rise to the Humanize.-

tion of Working Life Program in 1974 in the-Federal Ministry of Research and Technologyand the Federal MiniStry for Labor and SocialAffairs; The general objective of this researchprogram is to investigate the possibilities forbetter adapting working conditions_ to humanneeds. It combines the goal of establishing im-proved health protection on the job with thatof achieVing better opportunities for employ -'ees to gain qualifications anddevelop theirabilities. The program includes projects toredesign workplaces where monotony is oftencombined with time pressure; social isolation,and a lOW skill requirement;

The program, WhiCh is supported at least in.principle by all the parties represented in theGerman BinideStag and by both employer or-gaiiiiatioria and trade unions, has as its aims:

to formulate safety data, standards, andminimum requirementa for machinery, in-stallations, and workplaces;to develop work technologies adapted tothe worker;to elaberate models_for work organizationand workplace design; andto diSSeitinate and apply scientific find-ings, and industrial experience;

The humanization program has led to in-creased sensitivity to Problems- regardingworking conditiona and work rationalizationin industry and administration, and to an in-terdisciplinary science in the field of labor; Ithas given rise to projects to improve healthprotection on the job, in particular projectslooking at stress problems and the develop,ment of technologies for the reduction of

230

Ch. 5The Effects of Programmable Automation on the Work Environment 21

heavy; dangerous; or monotonous work; Theprogram also fosters experiments with newforms of work organization, aimed at new tech-nical and organizational production systems.

The results of humanization research havealready been incorporated into national legisla-tion in several casese.g., into the 1975 Work-places Regulation Act and the guidelines gov-erning it. Since mid -1980; the Federal Centerfor the Humanization of Work has been affil-iated with the Federal Center for OccupationalSafety and Accident Research as an independ-ent organizational unit; It is responsible forincorporating the results of government-pro-moted research concerning the humanizationof work into everyday working conditions.

One of the workplace areas to be studied hthe introduction of robots, with a view tcavoiding the creation of jobs that are uninteresting and monotonous for humans and thatmay entail considerable strain and stress. Continued support is to be given to improvedforms of work organization as well as to solu:tion of technical and organizational problemE.in general."

"Alfred Hassencamp and Hans-Jurgen Bieneck, "Technicaland Organizational Changes and Design of Working Conditions," a summary of the experiences and results of the WestGerman research program "Humanization of Work;" 1982.

Appendix 5A.Methodology Employed in OTC.Case Studies of the Effects of Programmable Automation

on the Work Environment

Case 1Small Metalworking Shops

This case study is based on visits to seven metal-workinshops in Connecticut. They were chosenfrom a group of sites suggested by the NumericalControl Society, a trade magazine, and two inter-viewees at the job shops themselves. They spana range of shop sizes, Shops were not chosen forstudy because _of their "representativeness"; in-deed, the chief selection criterion was that theestablishment be particularly advanced; for itssize; in the number of NC machines in use. EverVshop contacted agreed to participate in the study.The final group of 7 was drawn from a pool of 11shops that agreed to participate,

Visits lasted from a half day to a full day. Ateach site, the researchers began by speaking to thepresident or vice president; generally for an hOuror more Subsequent interviews were held withprogramers, foremen, working foremen, and shop-floor workers. For the most part, the people inter-viewed were selected by a manager or foremanbased on the research team's preferences for:talk-

,

1'

ing to a cross section of the shop's work force, Incases where the researchers asked to speak to aspecific person, these requests were honored. Atsome shops, the interviewers were invited to selectany of the employees -for interviews,

Interviews were open-ended, based on a _pre-pared interview guide. Generally, they lasted fromone-half to 1 hour, with the longest running over2 hours, Nearly all of the interviews were tape,recorded, with the consent of the interviewees, andmost of the quotations used in the report are basedon transcripts of the taped interviews. Interviewswere held in an office or room in the plant. In somecases, they were conducted in the president's orvice president's office, With very few exceptions;the interviewers were alone with the interviewee.All interviews except one focused on one persononly; atone plant, the president and vice presidentwere interviewed together;

Altogether; four presidents, four vice presidents,five programers. five foremen and working leaders,one quality control supervisor, one full-time ma-chine repairer; and fifteen machinists and oper-ators were interviewed.

231

214 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employ Ment, Edtidatien, and the Workplace

Agricultural Equipthent CompanyThis case study is based on data gathered dur-

ing a 6 -day trip. to the city in which the -compo-nents plant and the nearby tractor assembly facili-ty are located. Three days were spent touring thecompany's manufacturing facilities and conduct-ing interviews with members of management. Thebalarite of the visit was spent interviewing mem-bers of the local union;

The company was extremely cooperative, pro-vicling_the research team with an excellent over-view of plant operations and affording them free-dom to explore_areas of particular interest ingreater depth. The first 2 days- were spent gain-ing abroad introduction to the components plantand the tractor assembly facility; and the third daywas spent in followup investigation _and inter-views; particularly at the site of the flexiblemanufacturing system (FMS); Interviews wereconducted with company personnel ranging fromthe vice president for manufacturing to first-linesupervisors in the tractor assembly plant; Also in-terviewed were the plant manager; the managersof manufacturing engineering, mechanical eetV-ices; and process and tooling; several supervisorypersonnel; and the project manager and systemsmanager for the FMSall at the Comporieritsplant. InterVid*S were also conducted /with the

plantmanageri-manager of manufacturing engi-neering, and the controller at the tractor assemblyplant; ._

Interviews were open-ended, based; on a pre,pared interview guide but tailored to the individualbeing interviewed; and lasted frorii 15 iniriutes toseveral hours. Tonia and interviews were supple-mented by several brief presentations by companypersonnel focusing on different aspects of autorria=tion_at the company; by written_ materials suppliedby the company, and by relevant articles and infor-mation obtained by the researchers from othersources; - -

_The worker interviews on which this study is

based were arranged by the union; the _UnitedAutomobile Workers; and carried out in the ltital:union hall. The local union was very cooperativeabbut arranging interviews and providing thespace in which to conduct them. A semistructiiredopen format; similar to that need at the companybut designed. specifically for interviewing workers;was used to interview people both individually andin groups; The union was asked to arrange inter=views with _workera froth the FMS area and fromthose utilizing the company's labor reportingLsys-tem. Also requested were interviews with workers

from the components plant and the tractor WorkS,in skilled trades as well as production, of varyingages and Seniority. A total of 18 workers were in-terviewed through the union; In this situationselection bias was unavoidable, but the workersinterviewed appeared to represent a range of view-pciinta with respect to computerized technology;

Even the workers who were most critical of theway in which the company was implementing newprogrammable technologies expressed a basic re-spect for the company and its management;

Commercial Aircraft CompanyThe fieldwork for this case was conducted dur-

ing an 8-day visit to the west coast in April 1983.Before the arrival of the research team, contactwas made with the company and with the two marjor unions at tile research sites, the InternationalAssociation of MachiniSta and a professional en-gineers' association. Both the company and theunions were very cooperative, allowing access andarranging interviews Which form the basis of theanalysis.

At the company; a series of interviews had al-ready been scheduled when the reebarchera ar-rived. InterVieWeeS Were selected by the companymanagement based on the researchers' request forinterviews with a wide range of managerial person-nel; from higher level managethent inVolved in theimplementation and management of cdmputerizedtechnology to first-line supervisors in production'departments_ where programmable' automationwas in nee. TheSe interviews were supplementedwith additional interviews arranged at the requestof the research team during the 5-day viSit to thecompany. All interviews with members of manage-ment were conducted at or near the worksite of theparticular manager or supervisor, with a memberof management, who acted as host to the-researchteam, present at the interview.

Interviews were open-ended; andtheir structurewas based on an interview guide Prepared beforethe start of the ViSit. The actual content of eachwas tailored to the particular individual beingin-terviewed; based on his role in the company. Thelength varied from one half hour to several hoursin length. In Some cases, a tape recorder was used;and all lengthy quotations are transcribed fromthe tapes. A few of the interviews were precededor followed by prepared presentations which out-lined the features of a particular computerized sys-tem or technology-related issue at the company.Followup interviews; where necessary, were con-ducted by telephone, and additional written ma-

232

Ch. 5The Effects of Programmable Automation on the Work Environment 215

terial was obtained from the company. Companysources were also supplemented with written ma-terial available, elsewhere.

Interviews with-union members were conductedthrough the auspices of the two unions: Inter-viewees were chosen by the unions, based on gen-eral guidelines set by the research team. Theresearchers asked to interview members of thebargaining unit who were affected by new tecluml,ogy; particularly en&eera affected by the use ofcomputer-aided design; and machinists and other3.-vorkerg (e.g., inspectors, programers; and layoutworkers) affected by computerized technology,especially NC: Because of the way in which inter-viewees were selected, the workers interviewed

;cannot be viewed as being a randonily selectedsample of all workers at the company. While someattempt was made to ensure that a range of viewswas represented, the intention of the researcherswas to opture a sense of the variety of reactionsto programmable automation in a few selectedWork areas, rather than to attempt in a very briefvisit to assemble a "representative" group.

IntervieWS with union members were conductedat or near the union hall, and were, like the inter-views with managers; open-ended. Again, an inter-view guide was used, and the specific questionsadapted to the particular employees interviewed.Most interviews were group interviews, and allwere tape - recorded: Gsnerally; interviews with

-union members lasted from 1 to 2 hours, depend-ing on the size of the group.

In total, interviews were conducted with 14members Of management, 4 first-line supervisors,6 engineers and technicians, and 38 shop flooremployees, as -well as with officers of both localunions, including the presidents.

The Auto CompanyThe 3-day visit to the auto plant took place in

May 1983, and ineluded an introductory discus-sion and tour of the plant conducted by the Per-sonnel Department and a brief interview with theplant's manufacturing engineering manager on thethird day. The research team spent the remainderof the 3 ,days interviewing workers; shop floormanagers, union stewards, and union committee-men who work in the automated welding facilitythe "body shop:"

Throughout the visit, both management and theunion cooperated completely with the researchteam: The plant management permitted unre-

25-452 0 - 84 - 15 : QL 3

stricted access to the body Shop. The superintend-ents in the body'shop; in turn, allowed unrestrictedaccess to supervisors and workers: This access in-cluded the freedom to move independently aroundthe shop floor and to speak with workers on breakat their workstations; Only through this Uniquecooperation was the research team able to gain;in a brief time period, a detailed knoWledge of howautomation affected individual jobs and how theworkers on these jobs perceived the affects of thesystem.

During the 3 days, the research team inter-viewed:

the welder repair and production super-intendent;two welder repair general foremen and onewelder repair foreman; -one production general foreman and one pro-.duction foreman;three welder repairmen;19 production workers (6 first-shift workerswere interviewed for more than an hour at theunion hall and an additional 15 to 45 minutesOn the job; the remainder were interviewedeither -in the union hall or in the plant);the production and skilled trades' union stew-ards on first shift, and the production andskilled trades committeemen; anda number of other managers, union officialS,and workers with knowledge of some aspectsof automation and the body shop.

The group above represented about 30 percentof the production workers; 15 percent of the skilledtradesmen, 70 percent of the supervisors, and allof the union officials with first-shift responsibil=ities in the part of the body shop containingrobots.

Interviews with supervisors, union officials, andworkers were open-ended and loosely structured,based on a prepared interview guide; The inter-views at the union hall were taped, with the con-sent of the interviewees. The Quotations used inthe report are from the taped interviews or fromnotes taken during the meetings by someone otherthan the principal interviewer. The research teamconducted followup interviews of 15 to 45'triinuteawith certain individuals on the second and thirdday: Additional followup interviews were con-ducted with union officials and body shop super;visors over the telephone. An interview of the cor-poration's director of manufacturing was alia-o-qon-ducted over the telephone.

233

Chapter 6

E ducation; Tranng, andRetraining Issues

CtilitentsPage

:'-'unirnary of Major Findings219

Introduction219

The Changing Context for Education, Training, and Retraining 220

Effects of Programmable Automation and Other Technologies 222

Roles for Instruction iii a Changing Society 223

Categories of Instruction225

Current Trends in Instruction 226

Changes in Enrollment226

Changes in Emphasis232

Challenges Facing the U.S. Instructional System 234

Instructional Requirements for Programmable Automation 234

CaSe Studies: Selected Instructional Programs 241

Findings: Roles; Functions, and. Capacities of Progranis 241

Needs, Problems; and Trend§ Common to Industry and EducatiOn Programs 244

Career Guidance and Programmable Automation 249

Job Counseling; Outplacement, and Retraining for Displaced Workers 252

Education and Training in Europe and Japan 255

Summary of Comparative Data 255

Features of the Japanese Education and Training System WithRelevance for Progranuriable Autemation 258

Assessment Capacity of the Instructional System to Meetthe Challenge Posed by Programmable Automation 260

Current Instructional Capacity 260

TablesTable No.

Page

53. Number of Institutions of Higher Education and BrancheS by Level;Control; and State: ACEidemic Year 1981-82 228

54. Growth of Full-tinie Etirellment in Education, by Level

in Selected Countries, 1960-70 257

55. Rohoties Degree Programs and Course Offerings in North America; 1982 264

FiguresFigure No.

Page

18. Percent Change in Public Elementary/Secondary School EnfollnientBetween 1971 and 1981; by State 227

19. LevN and Control of Institutions of Higher Education; by State 229

20. Estimated Enrollments_ in Vocational-Education; 1978,79 230

21, Comparison of Yeara'of Formal Instruction Completed by Adults 256

22. Comparison of,,Publid Expenditures for Education 257

23. Results of the fiternatiOnal Skills Olympics, 258

24. Results of the_ iiternatierial SkillsOlympics 258

25. Maintenance T hziltian Training at Nissan URA 261

26. Manufacturing -echnician Training at Nissan U S A 262

27. Manufacturing Supervisor Trainini at Nissan U.S.A 263

\ .1'

Chapter

Education, Training, and-Retraining Issues

Summary of Major FindingsProgrammable automation (PA) is one of a

number of forces currently reshaping the rolesfor and values assigned to education, training,retraining, and related services such as careerguidance and job counseling.

Strong basic skills in math, science, andreading serve as the foundation for instructionfor programmable automation. Instruction forsemiskilled and skilled production line workersin automated facilities must emphasize con-ceptual and problem-solving skills as much asmotor skills. Instruction for technician-leveloccupations common to automated facilitiesmust focus on the deve pment of multipleskills (broader training) an on an understand-ing of how progrEurunabl equipment inter-faces with other components of the manufac-turing process. Instruction for engineers whowork in automated plants must emphasize abroader based knowledge of engineering opera-tions and stronger management skills._

A key ingredient in successful PA instruc-tional programs is close cooperation betweenindustry, educators, labor, and government insuch areas as skills assessment, curriculum de-sign, equipment acquisition, location of qual-ified instructors, and job placement. However,in most cases, this degree of intersector coop-eration is left to chance and often does notoccur.

The present capacities of the U.S. instruc-tional system, characterizkl by inadequate fa-cilities, shortages of equipment, and an inade-quate supply of instructors, may constrain theestablishment of adequate skills-developmentstrategies for programmable automation. Thisis as true for most industry-based instruction-al programs as it is for programs offered bymore traditional public and private education-al institutions. There are no indications thatthese barrierS to instruction will disappearover time, without specific, corrective actions.

Population groups served by different typesof instructional programs, as well as the num-bers of individuals taking advantage of in-structional services, are changing. However,individuals who are most likely to be affectedby technological and economic changethose s.

with lower incomes and lower levels of educa-tiontd attainmentseem to be the least in-clined to enroll in instructional programs inorder to develop new, more marketable skills.

Special approaches will be required to ensurethat retraining programs and job counseling!outplacement assistance geared_to the uniqueneeds of displaced workers are developed andimplemented. In the past,_ retraining for dis-placed worker8 has often been a "force fit,"and participation rates have been low.

IntroductionThe use of programmable automation in

manufacturing is one of a number of forces re-shaping education, training, retraining, andeducational guidance/job-counseling servicesin the United States. Among the other forcescreating increased demand for instruction are:1) technologiad change occurring in office and

service sector environments, 2) broad-basedeconomic change induced by U.S. participationin international markets and shifts in demandfor goods and services, 3) demographic change,and 4) increased interest in education and /training for personal and professional devel-opment. These forces may, in the long run, fa-

236 219

220 Computerized Manufacturing Automation:Employment, Education, and the Workplace

cilitate or impede the establishment of well-founded instruction for programmable auto-mation, depending on the aggregate demandthey generate for skills development and theinstructional resources required to addressthis demand.

Accordingly, the goals of this chapter arethreefold: to describe how the roles for and val-ues assigned to instruction are changing as aresult of economic, technological, and demo-graphic change and the heightened sense ofthe "unknown- created by this change; to ex-amine specific instructional responses to skillsrequirements for programmable automationat this early stage of adoption of the technol-ogies; and to discuss how present capacities

of the U.S. instructional System may affectskills development strategies for programma-ble automation in the long term.

A wide variety of sources, including educa-tion and training literatuie, personal inter-views, and site visits to manufacturing facili=ties and instructional centers, were used in de-veloping this_account of a cbsnging nationalinstructional system and in depicting how pro-grammable automation is being addressed bythat system. Fourteen in-depth case studiescreated for OTA describe_ selected, currentlyavailable education, training, and retraininggeared to PA. They served as a particularlyrich source of information in the developmentof this section of the report.

The Changing Context for Education,Training, and Retraining

In 1983, a number of stUdiea were releasedwhich reflected growing national aWareneSS ofthe importance of education, training, and r&training to international economic competi-tiveness, as well aS concern over the currentstate of elementary, secondary, and postsec-ondary instruction in the United States,Among the studies that have received themost attention are those of the National Com-mission on Excellence in Education (A Nationat Risk: the Imperative for Educational Re-form);' the Education Commis Sibii of theStates (Action for Excellence: A Comprehen-sive Plan to Improve_Oar Schools) ;2

r, the Business-HigherEdueatibii Foruin (Amer.ica's Competitive Challenge: The .Need forNational Response);3 the Twentieth CenturyFund Task Fbrce on Federal Elementary andSecondary. Edtitatitin Policy (Making theGrade);" and the Carnegie Foundation for the

National Commission on Excellence in Education; A Nationat Risk: The Imperative for Educational Reform (Washington,D.C.: U.S. Government PrintingOffice, April 1983).

'Education Commission of the States, Action for Excellence:A Comprehensive Plan to Improve Our Nations Schools(Denver, Colo.: Edubation Commission of the States, June 1983).

'Business-Higher Education Forum, America's COmpetitiveChallenge: The Need for a National Response (WaShington,D.C: Business-Higher Education Forum, April 1983h

'Making the Grade: Report of the Twentieth Century Fund

237

Advancement of Teaching (High School).6 Inaddition to emphasizing the obstacles repre-sented by shortages of equipment and quEdi-fled instructorsparticularly in science andmaththeie reports point to the low studentparticipation rates in science and math byondthe 10th grade, the high levels of functionalilliteracy within the general population, andthe implications these conditions have for con-tinued U.S. economic growth and participationin a world economy that is increasingly tech-nology-driven. The reports of the NationalCommission on Excellence in Education, theEducation Commission of the States, and theBusiness-Higher Education Forum all recommend a reassessment of the U.S. educational__system and curricula in light of changingworld conditions, including the growing useof advanced technologies in the workplace.

Given current levels of concern over the U.S.competitive position and the links betweencontinued development of the human resourceand sustained economic growth, it is difficult

Task Force au Federal Elementary and Secondary EducationPolicy (New York: Twentieth Century Fwd; Inc..; 1983).

'Ernest L. Boyer, High School (Princeton, N.J.: The CarnegieFoundation for the Advancement of Teaching, 1983).

Ch. 6Education; Training; and Retraining issues 221

to understand why the relationship betweeneducation and training and economic expan-sion has recently become a focus of nationalattentionespecially since the effects of edu-cation on the labor force have been the sub-ject of economic analysis for many years. Partof the answer may lie in traditional economicmeasures used to quantify returns on educa-tional investment. These measures examinethe relationship between different levels ofeducational attainment and lifetime wages,without taking into account all other influ-ences on lifetime wages:

In the interest of predision, economic anal-ysis has narrowed human contribution to itsmost measurable aspects such as wages andhours worked. So long as wages and othermeasurable evidence of human participationin the economy were on the rise, everythingwas fine: Interested parties; especially edu-cators, were satisfied to know that rates ofreturn to human investment were high andincreasing as the economy boomed andwages and leisure increased. With economicdecline and unprecedented demographicchange, however, wage returns on human in-vestment have headed downward; Those whoswallowed the simplistic "human capital"assumption that wage returns capture theoverall economic return to human resourcedevelopment in good times are; unfortunate,ly, hooked when the economy turns sour andwages decline. What we need is a more so-phisticated _ means for measuring humanquality and its impact on the economy.Unless we. can find such a method, we willcontinue to miss the woods for the trees inassessing the relative importance of humanfactors in production.°Regardless of how the human resource has

been viewed as a factor in production, or howwell its effects on the economy have beenmeasured, industry, labor, and governmentleaders all recognize tha': a highly developedhuman resource pool is critical to maintainingU.S. competitiveness. Individuals will there-fore place pressure on the U.S. instructionalsystem for programs that develop human

°A. CarnevEtle, Human Capital: A High Yield Corporate In-vestment (Washington, D.C.: American Society for Trainingand Development, 1983, pp 13-14;

skills essential to continued work force partic=ipation.

The automated manufacturing environmentrepresents but one of a number of work set-tings out of which new skill requirements willemerge in the years ahead. Therefore, it is im-portant not to overemphasize PA-related Skill8to the neglect of other types of general and oc-cupation-specific skills. The development ofstrong basic skills in math, science, and corn-munication remains an important educationalpriority for the work force as a whole.* Giventhe increased use of computers in many as-pects of American life; the demand for com-puter literacy programs is on the rise. In ad-clition, there is a need to better prepare indi-viduals for greater exposure to new technolo-gies in their day-to-day lives; whether ornotthey choose to be work force participants. Thisinvolves the development of a basic under-standing of scientific principles and processes,as well as of the relationships that exist withinthe physical world." A recent report of theNational Science Foundation's Public Under-standing of Science Program made referenceto:

. . . the increasing gap between the relativelysmall technological elite and the far largerpublic that is both poorly equipped to under-stand new_developnients, and is effectivelyprecluded from significant careers related toscience, engineering and high technology.Thus, tomaintain a vigorous and widely rep-resentative pool of potential talent for thetechnological professions; to assure a base ofawareness and understanding among deci-sion makers of industry, government, and thepress; to encourage the interest and familiari-ty that are needed to recognize and addressthe personal and public decisions related totechnology; and to meet the Jeffersonianideal of an informed electorate, . . . an interestand background experience with the prin-ciples and activities of science is critical.°

*Other priorities include increased emAhasts on foreign Ian-guNges from elementary school onward and a renewed emphasison humanities, particularly in interdisciplinary programs, suchas "technology! and society."

7E. Leonard Brown, "Educational Change: Educating for aTransitional Era," Puturics, vol. 7, No 3, 1983, pp. 11-14.

"Summary of Grants and Activities: Public Understandingof Science Program 1Washington, D.C.: National Science Foun-dation, March 1982. p. 4.

238,

222 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education

Effects of Program:nab10

and Other Techn(OTA'S analysis of employment effects Of

programmable automation indicates that coin!tinter:based manufacturing technologies will,bring about substantial changes inmanufac-turing skill requirements over time. However,several variables complicate the process ofquantifying limg-ierm employment impacts.The most important of these variables are: 1)

the rate at which programmable automationis adopted; 2) the ileicihility afforded by PAto combine people and equipment in produc-.tion in different ways; and 3) changing eco-nomic conditions affecting product demand;frequency of innovation; intensity ofcompeti-tion and; labor deinand within auto-mated manufacturing environments;*

Even at present low levels of utilitation, pro-grammable automation is creating new de-

, mands for education; training; and retraining`services; In the future, with more widespreadusedf advanced manufacturing technologies;there will be considerable-demands made Onthe U;S; instructional system formanufactur-ing-related Skills development and for rapidresponses to what may be frequient changesin skill requirements. For example; in a recentsurvey of members of the American Societyfor Triiiiiing and Development's Teclmical andSkills Training Division; 93 percent of the re-spondents indicated that; baSed on teChnolog-i-cal Chang*, -vithin their companies: 1) workersin their ii;..ms would require ?significantChanges. in skills"on an ongoing basis, and 2)Skill changes would typically be required with-in a relatively short time fraine-7-possibly lessthan 1 yean9 Programmable automation willalso stimulate renewed &Mail& for the devel-opment of strong; basic Skills in reading, math;and science that serve as the foundation forPA-related instruction. While some things areknown abinit the effects of PA On skills re-

*For II more detailed discussion of impacts on employmentand effette on working environment see clam. 4 and 5.

*Survey of rechnicitratd_Skilia Traning_Division, AmericanSociety for Training and Development. 1933:

AdveKath!

locatthataudIconeNittltuntiesecoimon

quiresthe tinthe onand m

Thebe tovelopEter de

Ch: 6Education; Training; and Retraining issues 223.

changes in skill requirements brought on bypossible increased use of PA andther factors.Instruction designed to accomplish these endsinvolves the development of: 1) strong basicskills in reading; math; and science; 2) analyticand problem-solving skills; which enhance anindividual's ability to operate effectively innew or modified work environments; 3) a broadoccupational skills base which in turn broad-ens individual career choices and serves as afoundation for _the development of additionalskills; 4) specific PA-related skills; and 5) arecognition of the need for lifelong instructionto facilitate continued participation in and ad-vancement within the work force. This newfuture-oriented approach. to education andtraining allows skill levels to advance at a ratemore in keeping With the rate of technologicalchange and stresses the need for flexibility tohandle frequent job changes within the samesector or from one sector to another. However;its central focus is on more extensive develop-ment of individual potential. It can help pre-serve or enhance mobility, reducing the chancethat workers are locked into, or out of, certaintypes of work as technologies and the economyundergo change.

This approach to instruction represents ablending of guiding principles from two tradi-tional but disparate schools of thought on theultimate goal of instruction: "education forwork" (focIls: occupational preparation) and"education for life" (focus: education for in-dividual development). It also softens thesharp distinctions educators and others havedrawn over the years between vocational/tech-nical education and professional education, forit stresses the importance of analytic andproblem- solving skills and of broad-basedoccupational preparation in both kinds ofinstructional experiences.*

Roles for Instruction ina Changing Society

The combined effects of technological andeconomic change are now observable in manyareas of U.S. society. But technological andeconomic change are also having pronouncedeffects on the expectations individuals andemployers have for instruction as a tool forpersonal and professional growth. These ex-pectations take the form of increased demandsfor specific kinds of instructional programsand services. Accelerated growth in newcourse offerings, heightened interest amongeducators and trainers in curriculum develop-ment; and new skill requirements or skillshortages expressed by industry are all evidence of these increased demands. Some ofthe new iilatructionEd demands emerge fromchanging skills requirements in particularworking environments. Other instructional de.mands reflect the impact that technologicaland economic change is having on society asa whole, and as such cannot be attributed Sim=ply to factors present within the workplace.Regardless of the circumstances that result innew education, training, and retraining re-quirement6, the institutions, organizations,and agencies that make up the instructionaldelivery system in the United States are calledon to develop programs and services that areresponsive to both individual and employer de-mands and to supply these programs and serv-ices on an as-needed basis. Given current andanticipated rates, of economic and technologi-cal Change, plus the resources presently avail-able to instructional providers for use in ad-dressing demand, hidividual and employer ei-pectations of theinstructional system are not--realistic and the full set of demands cannot bemet. An abstract discussion of representativeindividual and employer expectations for in-struction, as well as of conditions currentlyThe shaz-p, post-World War II increase in the amounts of

corporate, in-house technical and skills training activities hashad an influence on the nature and scope of some types of voca-tional instruction. Instructor and equipment costs associatedwith technical and skills training for employees, as well as nar-rowly defined production line jobs; have led to the developmentof in-house training that is often very narrowly focused anddesigned to 'develop, only those skills required for discreteclusters of skills. While this approach to skills instruction hasWorked well for industry in many instances. it has influenced

vocational education as a whole by leading to a deemphasis onanalytic and problem-solving skills development and a move-ment toward highly_ specialized instruction. For a cliscusaionof how high technology is affecting both the process, contentof, and planning strategy for vocational and technical educa-tion, see Warren H. Groff, "Impacts of the High Teelniologieson_Vocational and Technical Education," ANNALS, AAI"SS,No. 470, November 1983, pp. 81-94.

240

224 Computerized Manufadturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

faced by instructional providers, will establishthemes that will be examined in greater detaillater in this chapter.

Individual ExpectationsOTA found that individuals are concerned

about how economic and;technological changewill affect theth directlyabout the potentialfor more frequent job or career changes overa lifetime, and about the changes in skills re-quirenientS that seem likely to occur withinand across established occupations.* Giventhe recent,_ extensive media coverage of fac-tory and office automation; individuals nowin the work force and those preparing to enterit are particularly sensitive tothepotential fortechnologically induced skills changes. Anoperator of a flexible manufaCtiiiing system,interviewed in the course of an onsite investi-gation of working conditions in an automatedplant of an agricultural implements manufac-turer, put it this way: "If you're looking at 15years or so before retirethent, you'll be sweep-ing floors."

Regardless of their age or economic status,individuals who make the Connection betweencontinued skills enhancement and continuedemployment want access to instruction thatmakes the most of their previous training,their core skills; and that corrects basic skillsdeficiencies that may be interfering with thedevelopment of additional skills and proficien-cies; Theseindividuala-=young people prepar-ing for careers, or adulta now employed or re-cently displadedalab need access to reliableinformation on skills and occupations in de-mand, plus assistance in determining whattypes of instruction will adequately preparethem to compete for available jobs and main-tain employment. They also seem less Willingthan in the past to assume that eduCators,trainera, and career counselors know what isbest for them.

This discussion of indiVidual expectations b3 based on analy-sis of education and training literature, numerous discussionswith employees in the course of site visits to industrial facil-ities, and conversations with students enrolled in a variety ofeducation and training programs.

Employer ExpectationsOTA found that many employers, aware

that economic and technological change willaffect their operations and their competitiveposition, are placing increased emphasis on ef-ficiency and productivity. While employerscan influence how advanced automation af-fects workplaces,* they are concerned abouthow the use of advanced automation maychange skill requirements and how these newskills will be developed in current and futurepersonnel. This concern derives, in part,_fromdocumented problems of basic skills deficien-cies in the current work force and in the U.S.population as a whole.** Employers often holddifferent views from those of educator§ on thegoals of instruction that occurs prior to em-ployment. The Center for Public Resourcespolled representatives of industry; labor, andthe educational community on how well lmalschool systems prepare individuals for work;as well as on specific competencies based onbasic math; science, and communicationsskills. Survey results revealed a _great dis-parity between industry, labor, and educatorviews of-what constitutes "work-readiness"and what types of baseline competencies em-ployers have a right to expect of employees.The induatryilabor respondents had muchhigher expectations in the area ofpractical,basic competencies than did the educators."

Regardless of economic sector or geographiclocation, it is clear from statements employershave made in -various public forums, includingcongressional hearings, that many want an in-structional system that produces individuals

*For a detailed discusskiti of PA-related workingenvironmentissues, see ch. 4: "The Effects of Programmable Automationon the Work Environment."

* *The concern for basic skills deficien-ciesin the:general pop-ulation was First brought to light in 1975, with the release ofAdult Performance Level stildy, the final report for a 4 -yearstudy conducted by the University of Texas for the U.S. Of-fice of Education; The report indicnted that nearly 20 percentof the adult population of the United States was functionallyilliterate and, b7icanie of basic skills deficiencies, unable to per-form common dailyfunctions such as writing cheeks, shoppingfor food; or ordering a meal in a restaurant.

"Bildt Skills M the U.S. Work Force: The Contrasting.Parcej0-done of Buainees;_Labor, and Public Education (New York:Center for Public ReSources, November 1982).

24.E

Ch: 6Education; Training; and Retraining Issues 225

who have a. strong foundation of reading;math, science, and communications skills; whopossess core occupational Or professionalskills; and who have acquired analytic andproblem-solving abilities that will enable themto better adapt to workplace change. Inzen-eral, employer and individual demands arequite similar, with _the exception of -the em-phasis employers place on 'analysis and prob-lem-solving abilities.

Instructional ProvidersAt the same time individuals and employers

are demanding more from education, tr :; ' g,and retraining programs and related rvices,the U.S. instructional system is facing prec-edented obstaclesincluding shortages of in-structors in science, math, and technical fieldssuch as engineering; facilitiewwith limited ca-pacities relative to demand; and outdatedequipment. This is true for nearly all of the en-tities that are engaged in the design and de-livery of technical instruction, including in-dustry and labor. Educators in publicly sup-ported elementary, secondary, and postsec-ondary institutions feel constrained by re-duced Federal assistance and lower State andlocal revenues being channeled into instruc-tional programs. Industry-based human re-source development personnel, especiallythose who operate within older industries suchas auto, steel, and rubber, are bein forced toreevaluate their approaches and*programs.They are facing decisions of whether to expwidin-house course and program offerings in theface of low profit margins, reduced capital in-vestments, and increased foreign competi-tionconditions that usually precede a reduc-tion in corporate-sponsored instructionalprogramsor to attempt to identify othersources of instruction for their personnel.

Labor unions, while successful in negotiat-ing some agreements that call for the estab-lishment of joint union-management trainingfunds for workers on the job and for those whohave been laid off, now only represent about

20 percent of the U.S. work force.* Even inindustries within which the majority of work-ers are unionized, unions are operating underconditions more conducive to concessions thanto new demands. In addition, for unions andfor industry, there is a basic uncertainty about-how current instructional programs should berevised or expanded to reflect the increaseduse of advanced technologies and changingskill requirements, given the ongoing natureof technological change.

Categories of InstructionIn discussing how technological and eco-

nomic change are affecting instruction; it isimportant to examine the types of instruction-al experiences available to individuals:

OTA found that most instructional servicesfall -into- one-of four categories:

1"./Educationinitial preparation for workand for life;

2. Traininginstruction received upon en-try to the work site-that bridges the gap,if any, between skills developed throughformal education and skills required tofunction effectively in the workplace;

3. Retrainingall other forms of work-re-.lated instruction; including professionaldevelopment and skills upgrading; and

4; Continuing Educationinstruction thatis not necessarily directly work- or career-related, but often geared to personal de-velopment,

*Such funds require contributions from employers and indi-viduals. For example, the Los Angeles Electrical Training Trustwas established in 1964 to support education and training pro---grams for apprentices and journeymen covered under the-col-lective bargaining agreement between the International Bro-therhood of Electrical Workers' Local 11 (IBEW) and the LosAngeles Chapter of the National Electrical Contractors'Association. Under the terms of the agreement, Local 11members contribute to the Trust 5e for every hour worked,while their employers contribute 15e for every employee hourworked.jFor more information, see the IBEW case study in-cluded in app. A to this report.)

242

226 Computerized Manufacturirij AutOmatiOn: Employment; Education, and tpe Wo6place

Clearly this range of services, or experiences,constitutes in its fullest form a lifelong pro-gram of education. While lifelong educationhas been talked about in educational circlesfor a number of years, the combined influencesof tecimological and economic change are mak-ing the need for lifelong learning a reality forthe current and future work force, regardlessof the skill level considered. Individual6 arecorning to realize that, regardless of their levelof educational attainment prior to jointhg thework force, there are no guarantees of lifetimeemployment." Workplace change can/triggerfrequent modifications in job functions, orne-cessitate job changes or career changes that

"Samuel Brodbelt, 'Tducation as Growth: Life-long Learn-ing," The Clearing House; vol. 57, October 1983, pp. 72.75.

will require the_ evelopment of new or en-hanced skills. Many individuals may find itnecessary to undergo education, training, andretraining several times during their lifetimes.Some of these individuals may get tuition as-sistance and permission to pursue courseworkduring working hours from their employers;others may have to draw on their own timeand resources. Others may qualify for partic-ipation in federally funded training programsor for Federal student loans. Acceleratedchange in workplace conditions will also in-crease the emphasis on quality of instruction(e.g., curriculum content, qualified instructors,adequate equipment and facilities) and relatedservices, such as educational and job counsel-ing. It will also generate greater pressure forrapid response to frequent changes in instruc-tional requirements.

Current Trends in InstructionAs stated earlier in this chapter, program-

mable automation is but one of many forcesleading to thedevelopment of new instruction-al priorities. It is important to examinewhatis known about current enrollment palternsand then to focuS on new areas of em hasisfor the U.S. instructional system as a hole.These conditions establish the context for adiscuSSion of PA-related instruction d anevaluation of the capacities of the edu tionand training system.

Changes in EnrollmentPatterns of participation in education, train-

ing, and retraining programs have changedover the past few years. Population groupsserved by different types of instructional pro-grams are changing. Adults aged 17 years andolder with specific personal or occupationalgoals are participating in education, training,and retraining programs in record numbers.This is in sharp contrast- to earlier periods,when the heaviest levels of participation in in-struction were found among children and ad-

olescents. These earlier participation rates andpatterns reflected the predominant view of thefunction served by instructional programsformal education preceded employment andusually ended when an individual entered thework force.

According to the Nfttional Center for Educa-tion Statistics (NOES), elementary and sec-ondary school enrollments declined by 13 per-cent between 1971 and 1981. In roughly thesame period, enrollmentS in higher education(2- and 4-year institutions) continued to grow(see fig. 18). Full-time poStsecondary,studentsand all those enrolled in 4-year colleges anduniversities represented only 58.3 percent oftotal enrollment bSr. 1982. This is attributedto the expansion of public 2:year colleges dur-ing this period whose programs were oftencharacterized by open admissions policies,flexible class schedules, and perhaps a greaterinterest in the part-time, working student.During the period 1970-81, there was evidenceof a shift in enrollment from 4-year schools to2-year institutions, with enrollments in 4-yearschools dropping from 74 percent to 62 per-

243

Ch. 6Education, Training, and Retraining issues 227

Figure 18.Percent Change In PiiblIc Elementary/Secondary School Enrollment Between 1971 and 1981, by State

SOURCE: National Center forI Education 1982.

1N

cent (see table 53 and fig. 1 ). During the sameperiod, female pakicipati n in higher educa-tion grew steadil.3, while ale enrollment re-mained fairly stible. Minority: enrollmentreached16.5 percient by tLhe fall, of 1980: 9:4.percent of postserpndary students were blackand 4.0 percent Haspanic."Ileae data suggest

"The Condition ofEducation, f983- Edition (Washington,D.C.: National CmitiTrioijEducation Statistics); During 1981-82;there were 3,253 institutions of higher education operating inthe United States. Of this numblr, about one third, or approx.

_ Inuit* 1,200, were 2-yeaE co . Institutions that specializedin 4- year;: baccalaureate -level p grams and that did not dem-onstrate significant involveme t In post-baccalaureate educe-.

Deceased, more than nationalaverage ( -12.8 percent)

Decreased, Jess than or equal tonational average (-12.8 percent)

Increased

that postsecondary institutions are now serv-ing a much broader audience and, perhaps, awider variety of inst ctional needs. Shift in

Lion numbered 730. While t e vast majority of 21rear collegeswere public institutions ( 33), only 607 4-year colleos. wereprivately controlled (see bW 53_ and fig. 19). There were 167institutions that offered dottoral programs, and another 408institutions that off post-baccalaureate programs otherthan doctoral program . Some 645 institutions were classifiedas "specialized" by N ES, in that they placed emphasis wiltparticular program area, sbeli 0 engtheering. The majority ofspecialiied institutions were privately controlled and offeredbaccalaureate programs, post-baccalaureate programs, or both.In the "new institution' category, 2-year schools havedominated since the 1960's.

244

228 Gotnpt.terized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

Table 53.Number of institutions of Higher Education and Branches by Level, Control, and State:Academic Year 1981-82

State Total

All Institutions 3-Year Institutions 2-Year Institutions

Public Private Public PriVate Public Private

50 States and D C . 3.253 1,498 1,755 558 1;420 940 335

Alabaria .. ....... .. 59 37 22 16 . 15 21 7

Alaska_ 15 12 3 3 3 _9 0

Arizo_na_ 28 19 9 _3 _8 16 1

ArkansasCalifornia . ..

35272

19136

16136

1030

_10123

_9106

_6

13

Colorado ... 45 27 18 18 15 14 3

Connecticut 47 24 23 7 19 17 4

Delaware ..... 8 5 _3 2 3.- 3 0

District of Columbia. 19 _1 18 1 18 0 0

Florida 81 37 44 9 35 28 9

Georgia 1 78 34 44 18 29 16 15

Hawaii .. 12 9 3 3 3 6 0

Idaho .... _9 _6 _1 4 2 2 -1

Illinois 158 63 95 13 83 50 12

Indiana. 74 28 46 13 37 15 9

Iowa.... ... ...... 60 21 39 3 34 18 5

Kansas .52 29 23 8 20 21 _3

Kentucky 57 21 36 8 22 13 14

Louisiana 32 20 12 14 11 6 1

Maine 29 12 17 7 13 5 4

Maryland _56 32 24 13 21 19 __3

MassachUSetts 118 32 86 15 65 17 21

Michigan 91 44 47 15 41 29 6

Minnesota 70 30 40 10 32 20 8

Mississippi 41 25 16 9 10 16 6

Missouri 89 28 61 13 54 15 7

Montana 16 9 7 6 _4 3 3

Nebraska 31 16 15 7 13 9 2

Nevada 7 6 1 2_ _1 4 0_

New Hampshire 26 11 15 3 11 8 4

New Jersey_ 61 31 30 14 26 17 40

New Mexico 19 16 _3 _6 _3 10

New York- 294 86 208 40 168 46 40

North Carolina 127 74 53 16 34 58 19

North Dakota 17 11 6 6 4 5 2

Ohio 136 59 77 18 62 41 15

Oklahoma 44 29 15 14 11 15 4

Oregon _45 21 24 8 21 13 -3

Pennsylvania 202 61 141 24 108 37 33

Rhode Island 13 3 10 2 9 11

South Carolina 60 33 27 12 19 21 8

South Dakota 20 8 12 7 9 -1 _315

TennesseeTexas

_79156

2498

5558

1039

4052,

1459 6

,..r- \-)UMh_____ 14 9 5 4 3 5 2

_

Vermont 21 6 15 4 14i _2 1

Virginia 69 39 30 15 28 24 2

Washington 50 33 17 6 16 27 1

West Virginia 28 16 12 12 _8 _4 4

Wis_cansin 64 30 34 13 30 17 4

Wyoming 9 8 1 1 0 7 1

U.S. Service Schools ... = 10 10 0 9 0 1 0

NOTE: Branch campuses are counted separately.

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, 1 13S2 ,

Ch. 6Education, Training, and Retraining issues 229

Ore,

Cali forma

a

Figure 19.Level and Control of Institutions of Higher Education, by State

Hawaii

SOURCE: National Center for Education Statistics, 1982.

South Dakota

enrollment from 4-i to 2-year programs may/ re-floct the overall growth in demand for tach-nicians (see ch. 4 of this report), since formaleducational preparation for technician careersis typically a 2-year associate degree program.

Enrollment in vocational education reached16.9 million during 1980-81. Among salondaryinstitutions offering vocational education pro-grams, there were 10.5 million enrollments,while postsecondary institutions that/Were re-gionally accredited, State approved or classi-fied as "other postsecondary" by the Voca-

Minnesota_

Wisconsin

Iowa

Illinois

/Missouri

VS

sss-_ cak

Michigan

Pa4a

Ohio -21110--A OIndiana

Kentucky

Tennessee

Owen,

More public thanprivate institutions

More 2- year -than4-year institutions

All other

flo %Oa

iJ

ors%

DC.C.

tional Education Data System, accounted fora total of 6.4 million enrollments. The most re-cent information on the types of institutionsoffering vocational education programs is for1978-79. Among secondary institutions offer-ing vocational programs, public secondaryschools, area vocational centers, and second-ary-level adult programs accounted for thelargest share of the 19 million enrollments forthat period. By contrast, there was much lessdiversity in postsecondary institutions withsignificant enrollment levels; with 2-year in-stitutions accounting for 68 percent of all en-

246

230 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Ec

roliments (see fig. 20). Male and female par-ticipation rates in secondary-lev''el 'vocationaleducation programs varied according to enroll-ment areas, with females outnumbering males

Figure 20.Estimated Enrollments In

Secondary

1 2 Public secondary schools«ncludinq secondary level_adult programs): 12.513.000

3 Private secondaryschools: 22.000

Postsecondary

4 4 year institutions_o_thigher education. 309.000

5 2 year institutions pt_17;;Mer education 4.423.000

6 Punk,- noncolieglatecind-iity Schools:

7.11.000

7 PriVale_noncoJlegiate post-secondary schools: 989.000

1 +- 2

Enrollments included it

SOURCE N5tonte Center for Eclucat.on Statistics.

illations and malesnd industrial pro-), there were higherspanics, and other

(V EA)

Ch. 6Education, Training, and Retraintug Issues i 231

minorities enrolled in vocational educationprograms than in precollege and other typesof programs."

The number of adults participating in part-time education programs (usually defined asa course load of 9 credit hours or less), bothdegree - credit and nonacademic, has risen overthe last decade and is expected to continue torise into the 1990's. According to the resultsof the 1981 Adult Education ParticipationSurVey, at the close of the year ending May1981. over 21 million persons age 17 or olderwere enrolled in adult education programs,representing an increase of over 3 million since1978, Or 17 percent. As was the case in earliersurveys of adult education, the participationrates of whites were markedly higher t anthose of various other racial/ethnic groups.Whites represented 88 percent of all, those en-gaged in adult education activities." Individ-ual level of prior education attainment con-tinued to be one of the strongest "factors in-fluencing participation in adult education.* In-come level was another key factor.**

"National Center for Education Statistics, op. cit., 1983. Ac-cording to NCES. some 27,000 different institutions offered vo-cational education programs in 1978-79. Over half of these in-stitutions. or 15,700, were publicly funded comprehensive andvocational secondary schools. The second largest group of in-stitutions offering vocational education programs, "private non-collegiate postsecondary schools," numbered 6,800 and includedvocational/technical institutes and trade, health; aud businessschools. Also included among the providers of vocational educa-tion in 1978-79 were approximately 1,100 2-year and 600 4-yearinstitutions.

"Survey of Participation in Adult Education, conducted bythe Bureau of the Census for the National Center for Educa-tion Statistics, 1981.

*"For both 1978 and 1981, there was c direct positive rela-tionship between the numbers of years of schooling an_ d the rateof participation in adult education. Persons with en eighth gradeeducation or less participated in adult education at a rate ofonly 2 percent in 1981. On the other hand, 31 percent of persons with more than 4 years of college had taken part in anadult education activity during the year. A little over 11 per-cent of high school graduates with no college experience par-ticipated in adult education, while over 26 percent of those with4 years of college participated. The correspondence betweenhigher educational attainment and greater participation in adulteducation was evident across all racial/ethnic groups, and wasmost notable among females. Within each racieethnic group,the more well-educated an individual was, the more likely heor she would participate in adult education activities. The rela-tionship between greater attainment and participation was evenmore pronounced among females than among males, Male par-ticipation rates ranged from 2 percent for those with less than

25-452 0 - 84 - 16 : QL 3r

Work-Related InstructionBy 1981; approximately 83 percent of those

indicating participation in adult educationwere-in the work forcesome 17 million peo-ple. Of these, 70 percent held white-collar posi-tions,_including professional and technicaljobs. The 21 million individuals participatingini adult education activities in 1981 had over37,000 courses from which to choose. Close tohalf of the courses they took were within thefields of business (23 percent), health (14 per-cent) and engineering (10 percent), and approx-imately 60 percent participated for job-relatedreasons. For 42 percent of the men and 26 per-cent of the women, employers provided someor all of the tuition. Expenditures for adult ed-ucation in 1981 totaled $2.2 billion;, the aver-age expenditure pier pp~.-ticipant per course was$120. Approximately 54 percent of the adulteducation courses were provided by schools;the remainder were offered by industry, com-munity organizations; government agencies,and others.' 5

Industry mid Labor-Provided InstructionTwo important components of the U.S. in-

structional system whose activities are notfully captured in the description Of enrollmentsprovided above are industry and the labormovement. While there are no data on totalenrollment in industry-based instructional pro-grams, the American Society for Training andDevelopment estimates that the private sec-;tor spends between $30 billion and $50 billion

9 years of formEil schooling to over 28 percent for those wi$h5 or more years of college. While women with an eighth gradeeducation or lessparticipated at a rate of only 2 percent, thosewith -5 or more years of college participated at a rate of almost36 percent, 8 percentage points higher than men with the samelevel of schooling." (National Center for Education Statistics;op. cit., 1983).

**In_general, the higher the income, the greater the rate ofparticipation. In 1981, the participation rate for those with in-comes less than $7,500 was 6 percent; while approximately 19percent of individuals with incomes of $50,000 or more partici-pated. Adults residing in metropolitan areas comprised 72 per-cent of adult education participants. Participation rates relativeto population were higher for the Western States (27 percent)than for the North Central States (approximately 14 percent),the Northeast (10 percent), or South (1-' percent.

"National Center foi Education Statistics, op. cit., 1983.

248

232 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

annually on such programs.* Unpublished Bu-reau of Labor Statistics (BLS) estimates sug-gest that in 1982 there were 287,000 personsenrolled in apprenticeship programs in theUnited States. This repFesents a decline of33,000 since 1980.** While apprenticeship rep=resents only one of a number of types of train-ing offered by industry in cooperation with la-bor uni6s and labor organizations, there areno data available to measure the degree oflabor involvement in nonapprenticeship in-struction.

In summary, data available on enrollmentsin elementary, secondary, postsecondary, vo-cational, and adult education seem to showthat while the numbers of participants underthe age of 17 have been declining, there havebeen increases over the past few years M adultparticipation. However, given the high levelsof educational attainment, high incomes, rel-ative youth, and ethnic/racial makeup of thoseparticipating in instruction, individuals withinthe work force who are at greatest risk due totechnological and economic change are thoseleast predisposed to enrolling in courses thatmay lead to new skills development.

Changes in EmphasisNational recognition of the role that human

resource development plays in continued eco-nomic growth is leading to changes in instruc,tional priorities, especially for education andtraining that occurs prior to employment. Newareas Of emphasis that are already having animpact On curriculum are strong basic skillsin math, science, and communication; andcomputer literacy.

Basic SkillsWhile there are skill requirements associ-

ated with particular workplaces that change

This is a rough estitpate of the total, annual industry ex-penditure. ASTD is cooperating with the Department of Labor(D01,1 to estahlish nrchanisms for systematically gatheringdata on industry-based education and training aCtiVities.

*The program for tracking the numbers of registered appren-tices on an ongoing basis was eliminated as a result of DOLbudget reductions and program reorganization in fiscal year1982.

.over time, there are some types of slalls so im-portant that they are widely accepted as_essen-tial to individual and economic growth. Developrnent of these skills within the individualserves as a foundation for higher order person=al and career skills. Development of theseskills is also necessary for exercising mostrights of individual citizenship. The skillS thatcomprise this group, commonly referred to as"basic skills," have changed over timelo re-flect economic.., scientific, technological, andsocial change. Basic skills as currently definedare under national scrutiny to determine howviable they are and whether there are addition-al skills that are now so critical to individualand national growth that they should be addedt o t he core group.

Since the Colonial era, the need for basic- pro=ficiencies in mathematics,reading, and writinghas been recognized by educators as a centralgoal of instructional programs for children and ,

adults. With the creation of a public educationsystem in the United States during the 19thcentury, the goal was to provide to all school-age residents of the United States, includingrecent immigrants who represented a signifi-cant portion of the manufacturing work forceduring the Industrial Revolution, the oppor-tunity to develop these skills or proficiencies.These basic skills were to be developed in theprimary grades and were to serve as the foun-dation for hat! the vocational and academictracks established as a part of the 19th-cen-_tury public school system.16 17

Following the reemphasis on basic skills atthe founding of the public education system,the next major reexamination of basic skillsand their relation to occupational preparationoccurred in the 1950's, when increased concernover national defense and a national commit-ment to manned space exploration led to theenactment of the National Defense EducationAct.* This legislation encouraged secondary

"I. once A Cremin, Public Education (New York: BaskBook, nc., 1976).

"Sol Cohen, The Industrial Education Movement, 1906-17,"American Quarterly, vol. 20, No. 1, spring 1968, pp. 95-96.

*Some Would argue that basic skills - deficiencies that surfacedduring World War II among American military recruits led_toanother national examination of how baSic skills were being ad-dressed in elementary and secondary education.

Ch. 6Education, Training, and Retraining Issues 233

and postsecondary institutions to place addi-tional emphasis on the development of strongscience and math skillsThe act also soughtto increase the supply of scientists and tech-nical personnel thrOua individual scholar-ships and low-interest loan programs. Duringthis period, recognition of the increasing im-portance of the sciences for vocational and oc-cupational preparation and for understandingkey national issues led to a redefining of "basicSkills" to include a foundation in the sciences.And for a time, the development of strong ba-sic skills in this broader sense was a nationalpriority.

It is difficult to determine exactly when em-phasis on the development of strong basicskills diminished. However, employers beganto voice concerns about basic skills deficien-cies in entry-level personnel in the early 1970's.

The change in emphasis on basic skills mayhave been related to the broad range of socialissues that affected the educational systembeginning in the mid-1960's. The list of man-dates for the public education system grewrapidly in the late 1960's and 1970's. Educa-tional equity emerged as a top priority as aresult of the urban crisis, recognition of highlevels of unemployed minority youth, and thepassage of Fedefal legislation requiring schooldesegregation. With the passage of the Ele-mentary and Secondary Education Act, thepublic schools were charged with ensuringthat equal, educational opportunity was ex-tended to various target populations, includ-ing minorities, the economically-disadvan-taged, and the lamdicapped. Perhaps with theresources and attention directed at this andother important new educational priorities;federally funded educational institutions mayhave inadvertently deemphasized basic skillsdevelopment. Changing societal goals and val-ues, as well as changing demographics, havepresented challenges to educators since theturn of the century. And, at present, schoolsare caught between the requirements of an oldsociety, with its inherent goals and values, and

the requirements of an emerging, more tech-nological society."

Computer Literacy and the Basic SkillsIn the 1980's, continued advances in infor-

mation and communications technologies andthe growing use of computers in the work-place; in education; and in the .home havecreated an awareness of the value of a "com-puter literate" population. Computer literacyas a term came into use in the mid-1970'slSince that time; there have been a variety ofinterpretations of what it means to be "com-puter literate. '"920 While computer literacy-can encompass varying levels of knowledge ofcomputer technology, it usually refers to basickeyboard skills, plus a working knowledge ofhow computer systems operate and of the gen-eral ways in whichcomputers_can be used._ Forexample, Boeing Computer Services, a firmthat offers nationally a range of courses relat-ing to computer technology, covers the follow-ing topics in its "Personal Computer Literacy"course:

computer terminology;computer manuals (documentation);computer keyboards;diskette organization;computer files; andgeneral operating practices.

Based on the variety of environments withinwhich individuals are affected by computertechnology, as well as the importance of pro-moting understanding of science and technol-___=ogy within the general population, iducatorsand others are once again revisiting the defini-tion of "basic skills" and determining whether

1C_Elser; "The-American School Dilem-ma: OntheUpside -if the Third Wave," The Clearing House, October 1983.

"Ronald E. Anderson, "NittiiiiiM-Cdfnriiii-LitZfic-k 1981f,"Computer Literacy: Issues and Directions for 1985 (New York:Academic Press; 1982).

"Dorothy K. Beringer and Andrew R. Molnar; "Key Compo-nents for a National Computer Literacy Program," ComputerLiteracy: Issues and Directions for 1985 (New York: AcademicPress, 1982).

250

234 Computerized ManufattUring Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

it should be expanded to include computerliteracy:

Critics of computer literacy as an instruc-tional priority question its value to the popula-tion as a whole; they cite continuing advancesin software technology that will increase easeof computer use and eliminate the need for for-mal instruction. For example, alternative in-put deviCeS such as the light pen, the "mouse;!'and voice command are now becoming avail-able and are particularly popular with work-place personnel who are uncomfortable withkeybOarditig, such as managers.2' In addition,a majorobstacle to achieving widespread.com,puter literacy_ continues to be the high levelof finiCtititial illiteracy in the U.S:- population.Moat recent estimates indicate that one outof five Americans lacks sufficient reading,writing, and math skills to perform such coin-__

2'Craig Zarley, "The Wide World of Alternative InputDevices." Personal Computing, Febniary 1984; pp. 129; 131,

.133-34, and 137.

mon, day-to-day functions as filling out a jobapplication or handling personal finances.*The business community has bttome increas-ingly concerned about basic skills deficienciesamong employees, including college graduates.These deficiencies represent major obstaclesto professional performance as well as to con-tinued professional advancement. In a recentsurvey of representative§ of industry, tradeunions, and local school systems, two-thirdsof the industry representatives and the majori-ty of the union_ representatives indicated thatbasic skills deficiencies in employees limit ad-vancement opportunities. And, while the sur-vey indicated that a variety of cooperative ac-tivities existed between industries andschools, there were few cooperative programsaimed specifically at basic skills develop-ment."

*See reference to University of Texas study of adult illiteracycited earlier in this chapter on p. 224.

"Center for Public Resources, op. cit., 1982.

Challenges Facing the U.S. Instructional System

InstrUctiOnal providers are being asked totake on an increasing number of responsibili-tieS relating:0 human resource development.First, they are faced with continuing effortsto upgrade the skill levels of the U.S, populartiOn as a wholespecifically through the d-velopment of basic language, reading, math,and science proficiencies. At the same time,they are charged with addressing the need fordeveloping new skills and capacitieS, such ascomputer literacy and a basic understandingof science and technology Within, the generalpopulation; In addition, they must continual-ly review program& and services relating tovocational and professional development inthe light of economic and technologicalchange. It is within this context that the in-structional requirements for programmableautomation must be examined.

Instructional Requirements forProgrammable Automation

Some of the education, training, and retrain-ing requirements linked to the use of program-mable automation in manufacturing cannot bedistinguished from instructional rtquirementslinked to the increased use,of advanced infor-mation and' communications technologies innonmanufacturing work Settingse.g, theneed for a strong foundation of basic skills andfor computer literacy is alSo linked to the useof computer-based technologies in public andprivate sector office work sites. Other currentimpacts on the U.S. instructional system aredirectly attributable to programmableautomation and its effects on skills within ex-isting manufacturing occupationsthosewithin the production-line, technician, engi-

25j

Ch. 6Education, Training; and Retraining Issues 235

neering, and operations management groups.It is this distinct set of PA implications forvocational and technical education, training,and retraining that will be the focus of this sec-tion of the chapter.

It should be noted that certain conditionslimit this discussion of instructional require-ments for PA. First, advanced manufacturingtechnologi6S are now in limited. use While PAadoption will increase, patterns of use to datehave not led to investigations of skill require-ments and accompanying instructional needsthat go beyond what may be unique require-rnents of individual firms. Secondly, the liter-ature on PA-related skills and on instructionfor automated manufacturing environments isthin, consisting almost entirely of very generaldescriptions of individual courses or programs:-Because of these limitations, observationsmade in this section of the chapter on instruc-tional needs for PA are based in part on 14 in-depth case studies of 20 existing instructionalprograms that were prepared for OTA in con-junction with this assessment.

Instructional Requirements forProduction Line Skills

For jobs common to production work in au-tomated facilities, there appears to be a great-er need to develop the ability to apply conven-tional manufacturing skills in new, more con-ceptual ways. For example, in a CincinnatiMilacron, Inc. (CM I) training program for ern-

_ ployeeS of firms that purchase CMI's comput-erized numerical control (CNC) equipment,operators learn to interact with the controlpanel and to monitor rather than constantlyinteract with the equipment. CMI instructorsstress that while students, especially older ma-chinists, need to learn to use their knowlegeof machine operations (conceptual) more thanthey may have in the past, their knowledge oftraditional machining operations (motor) willenable them to anticipate CNC machine mo-tions and functions." Overall, electronic con-trol of production machinery of all types is ex-

"Cincinnati-Milacron case study, 1983.

pected to reduce demand for motor skills andincrease the demand for conceptual skills."

Instruction for some technician-level occu-pations is quite similar in some instances toinstruction for skilled trades occupations (e.g.,electricians and electronic technicians), giventhe similarities between certain skilled tradesjobs and selected technician-level jobs. Butwhere distinctions can be drawn--e.g., for ro-botics, programmable equipment field service,and NC part programing techniciansthefocus of technician-levelinstruction is now onthe development of multiple skills (greater skillbreadth) and of an understanding of how pro=grammato a equipment interfaces with othercomponents of the manufacturing process.

Traclitionallii, limIted employer-provided in-struction has been made available to semiskilled and skilled proction persomill be=yond apprenticeship and/or entry-leveltraining. PA has resulted in more emphasis ontraining for semiskilled and skilled workergroups. For example, like many other GeneralMotors' facilities; the "S" Truck Plant examined in an OTA case study had had no formalmechanisms for delivering in-plant, classroomand laboratory training to shop floor workersprior to the installation of programmableequipment in 1980. Since the plant educationand training department staff lacked the tech-nical expertise to provide such instruction,tr.kning for shop floor workers took the formof on-the-job training or was provided byequipment vendors. The plant's "New Tech-nology Training Program" established a per-manent technical training group and createdan awareness among plant management of theneed' for an in-plant training/applications labthat included equipment designated for train;ing purposes."

PrOduction personnel responsible for equip-ment/systems operation, and/or maintenanceand repair most often receive their trainingfromvendors-of_programmable equipment andsystems. Through these programs; production

"Barry Wilkinson, The ShopfiSor Politics of New Technol-ogy- (London: Heinemann Educational Books, 1983).

"General Motors casektudy, 1983.

252

236 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment; Education; and the Workplace

N

staff, along with all Other types of manufac-turing personnel, are oriented to general equip-ment/system features and operation. Rarelyis the training designed to address the uniqueapplications within a particular plant or facil-ity.* There are exceptions among vendors;however. Cincinnati Milacron, for example, of-fers formalized customer training courses forits NC and CNC machines and robots, but willalso develop instruction geared to partiCularcustomer applications and will provide train=ing design consulting services on request." Allfive companies studied who were prodticerS ofprogrammable equipment or systems -=-includzing Compptervision, CADAM Inc. CincinnatiMilacron; inc,, GSA, and Automatixprovideinformal on-the-job training to customers onan as-needed basis to supplement instructionprovided at installation. Formal training pro-grams range from 2'/2 dayt to 3 weeks.

Both producer- and user-provided trainingfor production personnel stresses hii* to Operzate, monitor; maintain, andrepair programma-ble equipment or systems. In -plant coursesamined which were provided by user firmswere very narrowly focuSed and intensive,with training period§ Of 1 to 2 weeks.27

In some instances, PA-related training krskilled production personnel with PreVi;ous exposure to electromechanical technologyis broader in scope; Presumably, theSe workersare graduates of apprentideship programs andhave broader skills on Which to base instruc-tion: For example,the International Brother-hood of Electrieal Workers' Local 11 ElectricalTraining Trust in LOS Angeles County, Calif.,provides voluntary training to journeymen

*ThiS was one important finding of the OTA-sponsoredsurvey of views of education, training; and retraining for pro-grammable automation. For more informatien on the survey;see Automation and the Workplace: Selected Labor, Educationant Training Issues (Washington, aC.: U.S. Congress, Officeof Technology Assessment, OTA-TM,CIT-25, March 1983).

: "Cincinnati Milacron case Study. 1983."In-plant, user firm training was examined at the fallowing

companies/plants: 1) a large aircraft manufacturer (asked notto be identified); 2) Texas Instruments; 3) CADAM Inc.,a sub-sidiary of Lockheed Corp. and producer of computerzaideddesign software; 4) Cincinnati Milacron, a vendor of robots.computer-aided machine tools, and machine controls: 5) a Gen-eral Motors' "S" Truck Plant; and 6) Westinghouse Corp.'SDefense and Electronics Systems Center.

electricians on the inst allation and mainte-nance of programmable controllers. The train-ing is designed to deVeldp in enrollees who pos- .sess a backgrotind in electricity an under-standing Of electronics technologya relatedbut Separate discipline.28

Corrununity colleges take a variety of ap-proaches to technician-level _instruction fOrPAfrom single courses_ to 2-year associate,degree programs. Henry Ford Community Col-lege (HFCC) in the Detroit area offers an "Ail-

, tomatiOii/Robotics Option" within its 2-yearElectrical- Electronics---Program. Among thesubjects covered are programmable controllersand other computer-aided manufacturing(CAM) equipment. HFCC has also developedseveral courses on programmable controllersgeared to the needs of union apprentices andjourneymen. Glendale Community College inLOS Angeles County operates a short- term -in-dustrial training program on computer-aideddesign (CAD) in conjunction withlocatindus-try and government; Both HFCC and Glen-dale encourage students to Continue their ed-ucation beyond the associate-degree level byindicating courses that could be applied to a4-year bachelor of science: degree." "

There are some attempts -under Way to de-velop a standardized curriculum for techni-cian-level occupations within the field of pro-grammable automation; The advantage of thecore curriculum is that it deVelops a broadfoundation of knowledge on whiClitO baSe sub-sequent PA instruction during the same in-structional period or at a later date. For ex-ample; the Center for_Occupatienal Researchand Development (CORD), a nonprofit orga-nization that develops instructional materialsfor emerging technical fields, has developeda core currictiluin to Which tomponents forrbbOtiCS, computer-aided drafting, or lasertechnology can b0 added. The core curriculumseeks to develop interdisciplinary skills,including:

"International Broi.herh6cid of Eleetrital Workers case study.1983,

"Henry Ford Community College case study. 1983.'"Glendale CAD/CAM Operator Training Program case study,

1983.

253

17:

skilled electricians; members of Los AngelEare attending a 6-week training program deSignecprogrammable controllers. Since the training prchave completed the program offered by the Los Anprogrammable controller course: Graduates are errin manufacturing facilities. For more information t

of this chapter entitled "Case Studies: S

electrical;mechanical',fluidal;thermal;optical, andmicrocomputer technology.3'

Community colleges and vocational schocseveral StatesOhio, Oklahoma, New Me

"Interview with Dan Hull; PitsideK. CORD; May I

7g, and Retraining Issues o 237

. _

dlt: Los Angetes Electrical; Training Trust

Irhood_Of Electrical Workers;troubleshoot, and maintain.170 members of the Local

lave completed an advancedintaln_ automated equipmentA_to this report; the section236 of this chapter

pted the CORD_ electro-m as the standard forxi their, regions.

PA instruction for tech-along traditional lines.

Durses are often simply-ricula, such as electro-y. While such programsens qualified to operatemanufacturing facilities,

238 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace. .

they may or may not equip individuals for fu-ture workplace change. Programs that devel-op a broad interdisciplinary knowlege base,that emphasize computer technology, and thatimpart a broad understanding of the sySternas well as its components areessential if indi-viduals are to have the flexibility to face futurePA-related change in the workplace." One pro-gram that seeks to develop this broad-basedunderstanding of the_system and componentsis a Brigham Young University (BYU) 4-yearengineering technology program, which is de-scribed in detail in appendix A to this report.

In two of the manufacturing lacilitieSStudied, Westinghouse Defense and Electron;ics Center and Texas Instruments, the train-ing of shop floor personnel on automatedequipment was linked to research and devel-opment activities. This link benefits re-searchers and production staff. Both firmshave established manufacturing technologycenters where the training of shop floor man-agers and workers who will utilize the tech-nology once it is installed is conducted in con-junction with applications research._At bothfacilities, trainee involvement helps the re-searchers by providing information aboutshop floor=user needs and opportunities to testand utilize manufacturing technology in apractical environment. It also helps slibp flocii-worker8 by allowing them to become familiarwith the technology before it becomes a permanent part of the manufacturing process,

--and by enabling them to express their needs,concerns, and dissatisfactions prior to finalsystem implementation.33 34

Instructional Requirements for Engineers

Design and production engineers who workin computer- automated facilities are requiredto have a broader based knowledge of engi;neering operations and stronger managementSkills than those who work in more convention;

"Dan Hull, "What is High Technology?" Developin_i HighTechnology Vocational Progriuts; American VocationalAssociation and the Center for ;occupational Research andDevelopment; May 1983.

"Westinghouse Defense Electronics Center case study, 1983."Texas Instruments Corp: case study, 1983.

al manufacturing plants. There is also muchgreater emphasis placed on understandinghow PA may be most effectively applied. Inkeeping with these new skill requirementS,some engineering schools are placing greateremphasis on hands-on experimentation andproject-oriented instruction and less emphasison the _more traditional, theory-basedinstruction.

For example, Worcester Polytechnic Insti-tute (WPI),_ a primarily undergraduateengi-neering and science institution, joined forceswith Emhart Corp. in 1981 to form an on-cam-pus research center. In addition to providingEmhart and other firms with a manufactur-ing engineering applications research capaci-ty, the center offers engineering students theopportunity for regular contact with practic-ing engineers and with practical problems andsituations in the form of industrial "projects."Two projectsone focusing on an applicationwithin the student's major field and the otherfocusing on broad societal impacts of technol-ogy's applicationare graduation require-ments for all WPI students."

BYU offers an engineering technologypro--gram with specialties in manufacturing, de-sign, and electronics. All three of the BYUtechnology programs subStitute application-oriented, laboratory-based courses for thehighly theoretical coureework of traditional en-gineering programs. The goal is to combine afoundation in theory with practical applica-tions experience. (See photo on p. 246.) Com-puter-aided design; and manufacturing havebeen a part of BYO's engineering technologyprogram since the rnid:.,1970's.*

Attempts are being made on the undergrad-uate' and graduate levels to familiarize designengineers with manufacturing requirementsand, conversely, to familiarize production en-gineers with design procedures. In addition,there is more emphasis being placed on devel-oping the ability to take the entire design-man-

"WPI's Manufacturing Engineering Applications Center casestudy; 1983

*A summary of the case study on aytre Engineering Tech=nology Program is included in app: A to this report.

Cl: 6Education, Training, and Retraining issues 239

ufacturing process into accounte,g.; throughthe systems approach; which focuses on theintegration of computerized systems withmore traditional forms of automation. Stu-dents enrolled in BYU's master's program incomputer integrated manufacturing are re-quired to have at least 1 year of industrial ex-perience. They are free to pursue either CADor CAM as an option within the program, butare required to take courses from each special=ty area and learn to integrate coniputerizedsystems to solve practical, recurring)industrialproblem_ s.36 The University of Michigan's Col-lege of Engineering, although more/traditionalin its approach to undergraduate engineeringeducation thar some of the other Ichools-stud--led, offers students_ a graduate-level programin inter rated manufacturing, In 1981, the En-gineering College established a Center for Ro-botics and Integrated_Manufacturing (CRIM)in order to coordinate and exiiand research andteaching activities relating to computer-based_automation. In 1982-83; a total of 45 graduatestudents participated in CRIM-sponsored re-search projects;"

The effects of programmable automation onengineering education will depend on the ap-proaches taken to engineering instructionwithin individual educational institutions andprograms. If the more traditional approach istaken on the undergraduate leveli.e.; a focuson developing an extensive; theoretical frame-work on which to base practical experiencethen PA will represent more of a force forchange 'n graduate and continuing educationprograms; If individual institutions placegreater emphasis on combining theory withpractice in undergraduate engineering educa7tion, and in so doing emphasize CAD andCAM, then advances in PA research and ap-plications will continue to trigger curriculumchange on the Undergraduate ieyeL The irtiii=ety of approaches currently being taken to pro-grammable automation in engineering educa-tion does suggest that individuals preparingfor careers in engineering should be aware of

"Brigham Young University case study, 1983."University of Michigan case study, 1983.

the lack of standard approaches to curriculumcontent. The mix of theory and application; aswell as the exposure to programmable tech-nologies; differs from school th school.Regardless of approach; a critical need for ed-ucation is to ensure that engineering labora-tories and curricula reflect the state of the artof the technology."

Instructional Requirements for ManagersThere has been concern within industry for

some time about the lack of management ex-pertise in technical personnel. Indeed, someobservers suggest that industrial managerswho are cautious and detail-driven, coupledwith a corporate decisimunaking process thatstresses short-term financial considerationsover the potential for long-term gain, have Sub=stantially delayed redesign and retooling ofthe U.S. manufacturing S6ctor.39 Traditionalengineering programs have not StreSSed theneed for the development of management com-petencies, nor have traditional managementeducation programs offered special coursesgeared to the needs of technical and engineer-ing operations managers. A recent report ofThe American Assembly of Collegiate Schoolsof Business, the accrediting body and profes-sional organization for the deans of approxi-mately 600 undergraduate and, postgraduatebusiness schools in the United States, recom-mended that business schools address criti-cisms of overemphasis on finance and market-ing in their curricula by giving equal weightto production processes and productivity."Professor Tom Lupton, director of the Man-chester Business School, University..of Man-chester (United Kingdom), who has conducted

astudyof management development pro-

"Donald D. Glower and Lindon Saline, A Response to Ad-vancurg Technologies; Repositionim? Engineerirm Education toService America's Future (Washington; D.C.: American Societyfor Engineering Education, 1982)

"Wickham Skinner, "Wanted: Managers for the Factory ofthe Future," ANNALS, AAPSS, No. 470, November 1983, pp.102-114.

"Report on US. Productivity and International Coin-petitiveness, sponsored by The American Assembly of Col-legiate Schools of Business at George Washington Universi-ty, Washington, D.C., June 13-16, 1983.

256

240 Computerized Manufacturing kW-OM-at-Ion: Employment; Education; and the Workplace

grams in Western Europe, made these obser-vations:

. Management education everywhereinEurope and North America certainlyhassuffered from the attempt to bring the worldinto the classroom rather than to take theteacher (or rather the organiser of lemming)into the fields of action. However, it is en=couraging to notice the beginning of a shiftfrom the passive to more active modes oflearning. . Yet although the shift is hap-pening in many schools, movement is sloW."

The need for managers of automated man=ufacturing facilities and other _complex Opera=tions to possess an understanding of the totalmanufacturing system and all of its compo-nents has led some universities to create newmaster's degree programs in technical man-agement. The University of Pennsylvania'sWharton School has instituted a program en-titled "Management and Technology"a jointventure between Wharton and the Universi-ty's Engineering School. The Sloan School ofManagement at MIT also offers a graduateprogram in the management of technologicalinnovation. Yale University, too, has estab-lished an engineering management programon the gradtate levela joint venture betweenthe engineering and management schools; Andin the fall of 1983, BYU's Technology Depart-ment began to offer a graduate degree in tech-nical management as a cooperative effort be7tween the College of Engineering Sciences andthe School of Management.*

Some universities are going beyond thedisciplines of engineering and management toinclude an even broader base in their manu-facturing engineering curricula. With the aidOf a 4-year, $2 million grant from the IBMCorp., Lehigh University of Bethlehem; Pa.,is launching a graduate-level manufacturingsystems engineering program that will inte-grate "systems perspectives with interdisci-plinary education and training" and combineacademic coursework with "industry-oriented

"Torn Lupton, Management Develtwment in Western Eurork(Manchester, U.K.: MiTnchester Business School, 1982).

*For additional information on this prow-arm; see the BrighamYoung University case study, included in app. A to this report.

internships, laboratories, simulations, plant in-spections and projects."i2 Lehigh is one of fiveuniversities benefiting from multimillion-dol-lar IBM grants to encourage the establish-ment of manufacturing systems engineeringprograms. UCLA's School of Engineering andApplied Science draws its graduate-level man-ufacturing engineering curriculum from thedisciplines of materials science, mechanics andstructures, computer science and engineering,electrical engineering, and engineering sys-tems."

Segments of the training industry and pro-fessional societits are also becoming aware ofthe interest in and need for technology man-agement courses for engineers and nontech-nical personnel employed in automated man;ufacturing facilities. Boeing Computer _Serv;ices (BCS); a subsidiary of the Boeing Co._ -6producer of commercial and Military aircraftis an established provider of technology-basedtraining to commercial firms and Federal,State; and local governments. BCS'is test-mar-keting aseminar for managers to Provide themwith information on the basics of CAD andCAM systems and related terminology; as wellas aprirrier on computer graphics and the useof CAD and CAM software. Also covered inthe seminar is a step-by-step approach to man-aging a CAD and CAM project; including:

considerations for purchasing hardware,methods to ensure efficient system use toachieve maximum_ productivity,procedures for defining training require-ments and implementing a trainingprogram,procedures for choosing proper systemsapplications for a particular environment,andprocedures for establishing a data man-agement system."

"B. Litt and M. Groover, Developing Manufacturing SysCemsEngineers for the Future : -A Unique Industry- University JointVentures; paper pi esented at the American Institute of Deci-sion_Sciences, Southwest Conference,_ Feb. 29, 1984. /

"Vic Cox, "Materials acience and Manufacturing Engineer-ing: The New Alchemy," The Minority Engineer, winter 1984,pp.17, 20, and 22.

"Information provided by Boeing Computer Services, 1983.

25?

Ch. 6Education, Training. and Retraining issues 241

To date, six courses have been delivered, witha total of 180 managers enrolled. Trade andprofessional organizations, such as the Socie-ty of Manufacturing Engineers, offer shortcourses in technical management to theirmembers and other interested individuals,often in conjunction with national and regionalconferences.

It is too soon to judge whether these tech-nology management programs and courssconstitute the beginnings of a trend. However,continued industry pressure for more effectivetechnical managers may well lead to greateremphasis on the development of managementskills in :.ndustrial engineering and computerscience programs.

Case Studies: Selected Instructional ProgramsThe instructional system in the United

States is a loose confederation of institutions,agencies, and organizations from the publicand private sectors. The intent of the pro-grams designed and delivered by these instruc-tional providers varies widely. This is no lesstrue for instructional programs that are de-signed to develop skills required in automatedmanufacturing facilities. Within this sectionof the report are included highlights of find-ings of an in-depth examination of 20 instruc-tional programs for automated factory envi-ronments. These programs are representativeof relatively successful efforts initiated bysecondary and postsecondary educational in-stitutions, vendors of programmable equip-ment and systems, users of programmableautomation, labor unions, and Federal and/orState-funded retraining facilities. Cooperativeinstructional programs of various types arealso featured. These findings also shed somelight on the strengths and shortcomings ofcurrently available instruction, problems en-countered in program design and operation,and the roles assumed by educators, industry,labor, and government in these innovativeeffortsroles that may be representative ofemerging roles for these sectors within the in-structional system as a whole.

To supplement this discussion of trends andpatterns in PA-related instruction, appendixA to this report contains summaries of five ofthe case studies developed:

a robotics and computer-aided draftingprogram for high school students, oper-

ated by the Oakland County school sys-tem in southeastern Michigan;the undergraduate and graduate degreeprograms in engineering technology offered by BYU, Provo, Utah;CADAM Inc.'s* customer training incomputer-aided design;the Los Angeles Electrical TrainingTrust's programmable controller trainingprogram; andthe "CAD/CAM" operator training pro-gram, at Glendale Community College,Glendale, Calif.

Appendix A also contains a brief descriptionof the case study methodology.

Findings: Roles, Functions, andCapacities of Programs

The findings listed below are based on theuniverse of 20 programs encompassed in the14 case studies. It should be emphasized that,even though careful consideration was givento ensuring variety and comprehensiveness ofprogram types, the findings are limited by thesize of the sample. Therefore, while certaingeneral conclusions can be drawn, these arebased solely on the scope of the programsinvestigated.

Primary Education. One primary programwas examined: the Dallas Independent SchoolDistrict's Project SEED. It emphasizes build-ing basic mathematics skills and interest in

*CADAM Inc. is a subsidiary of Lockheed Corp.

258

242 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment; Education, and the Workplace

mathematicS as the foundation for furthertechnical studies. Because the program canreach all school-age children in the district, ithat the capacity to achieve an extremely broadimpact by increasing the number of studentscapable of and interested in more advancededucational programs focusing on PA andother technological fields."

High School Education.Two high schoolprograms were investigated: the Dallas Inde-pendent School District's Science and Engi-neering Magnet School; and the OaklandCounty, Mich., robotics and computer-aideddrafting programs. Programs examined eitherfocus on or include computer literacy, pre-engineering, basic computer science, comput-er-aided drafting, and robotics. Career awarenets is also stressed. The programs examinedindicate that PA studies can be introduced ef-fectively at the high school level, especially iforientation to computer-aided techniques isstressed as part of a comprehensive vocationaleducation _program focused on core tradeskills." 47

Community Colleges.Henry Ford Commu-nity College (Michigan), Eastfield_Communi-ty College (Dallas), and Glendale CommunityCollege (Los Angeles County) were the sitesstudied. The major functions of their pro-grams are: 1) granting 2-year associate degrees(or degree options) focusing on or includingrobotics or computer-aided design, and 2) of-fering short-term work-study training pro-grams jointly operated with industries andgovernment agencies for students with pre-vious college-level technical coursework. Also.included among community college functionsare career counseling and agreements withlocal universities to enable students toproceeddirectly to B.S. programs. The 2-year collegesstudied are all characterized by responsivenessto induStrial skill needs and coordination withlocal industries on such matters as curricu-lum content and_equipment needs. Majorstrengths are the practical orientation of thetechnical programs, the industrial experience

"Texas Instruments case study. 1983.

"Oakland County case study, 1983.

of the instructors (usually a hiring require-ment), and their balancing of the needs of thestudents and the community at large with-in-dustrial demands for specific skill preparation.The colleges' focus on practical, technician-level coursework makes them excellent vehi-cles for responding to the growing need toretrain displaced workers. Major weaknesses

--stem-primarily from lack of adequate fundingto purchase industrial-quality equipment andbuild needed laboratory

Universities.The examination of the uni-versity's -role in PA instruction focused onfourengineering and technology programs: 1) Uni-versity of Michigan; 2) Brigham Young_Uni-versity; 3) Texas A&M University; and 4) Wor-cester Polytechnic Institute. University ap-proaches range from: 1) introducing PA stud-ies as a major focus (CAD) or minor option(CAM) in 4-year technology program8 thatsubstitute practically oriented coursework forthe most theoretical of the courses requiredin engineering curricula; 2) introducing CAMinto undergr4duate curricula through projectswith industry or projects that simulate indus-trial conditions, plus the use of innovative in-structional techniques that enable engineeringundergraduate students to begin to focus onCAM at that level; to 3) reserving the focuson computer-aided manufacturing (or, comput-er:intevated manufacturing) for graduate-levelprograms so that undergraduates may firstmaster the fundamentals of traditional engi-neering disciplines. In the three universitiesstudied in depth,* computer-aided design ismore comprehensively covered in undergrad:uate engineering or technology curricula thanis computer-aided manufacturing.

The research functions observed at univer-sitieS, and the capacity to engage in PA re-Search, are equally varied, ranging from indus-trially oriented applications research to long-term research aimed at areas of potentiallyhigh technical or economic impact where sue:cess is uncertain. While the latter type of

"Henry_Ford Conununity College. Texas InStr.iMents. andGlendale CAD/CAM Program case_studies. 1983.

`University- of Michigan, Brigham Young University. andWorcester Polytechnic Institute, case studies, 1983.

,q

Ch. 6Education, Traintng, and Retraining Issues ! 243

research may fill a need that many industriesdo not have the luxury to. address, the formermore effectively fills industry's short-termneeds.* As in the cases of the high school andcollege programs, most university programsare limited in capacity by less-than-adequatefunding, equipment, and laboratory facilities."

Apprentice and Journeyman 3'raiiiing.7-Themajor function of the union training programsobservedboth of which serve industrial elec-triciansis to build PA training onto a solidcore of fundamental trade skills either duringthe final year of apprenticeship training or involuntary or company-sponsored journeymantraining." Union-sponsored or oriented pro-grams observed differ from university andsome college programs in that they are not de-signed to place technology studies in the con-oktext of broad-based humanistic education.However, the union programs concentratemore on the development of a given individu-al's skills than in-plant training programs gen-erally do (see below). Whereas most in-planttraining focuseS on task- oriented skills re-quired to perform a specific job, the union pro-grams focus on adding PA-related skills to thecomplete range of skills required to performas a journeyman in a specific trade.5'

In-Plant Industrial Training. All_of the in-plant training programs observed52 providejob-specific classroom-laboratory training fo-cused on the precise applications needs of theplant. A broad range of mach.:ne- or system-specific programs were examined along with

erall systems orientation training for man-agers. In-plant programs are both efficient andeffective because they are: 1) specifically fo-cused on well-defined applications needs; 2) de-livered to students grounded in both plant pro-

*See the later section on ooperative In ustrrEducationPrograms" for discussion of mutual benefits deriVed from jointeducation research projects.

"UniVersity of Michigan. Brigham Young University;Worcester Polytechnie Institute, and Texas Instruments casestudies. 1983. -

"International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Program-mable Coritr011er_Trixining Program.

"International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers case study;1983.

"Texas Instruments; an aircraft manufacturer (asked not tobe identified); CADAM Inc.; Cincinnati Milacron; and West-inghouse Defense and Electronics center.

cedures and core trade skills who can put theirnew skills into practice immediately and con-tinuously; and 3) more user-oriented thanother types of PA training, since the trainersare normally in close contact ,/with system_users, programers, and maintenance person-nel and usually have current orprevious plantexperience in those fields. /However, theStreamlined efficiency of in-plant training lim-its its range: students normally learn onlywhat they need to know to perform their jobs,and no more. Some in-plant training is alsolimited by a lack of resources devoted to oravailable for training.

Vendor Training.The major function ofthe instructional programs delivered by pro-ducers or vendors of PA equipment and sys-tems is machine= or system-specific trainingwhich is usually not application -oriented.*Such programs generally are not designed todo more than give customer trainees a thor-ough orientation to the equipment itself andthe basic skills required to use it; advancedvendor training courses impart greater depthof maintenance and some advancedtraining focuses on generic applications, suchas welding or line -backing (in robotics) andmechanical design o printed circuit board de-sign (in CAD). Some PA vendors, such as GCACorp. (semiconductor equipment, remothan-dling and large-scale robotic systems), offerseveral levels of/ structured .courses in keyareas such as maintenance. Other vendors,such as Computervision (CAD hardware andCAD and CAM software) and Automatix (ro-botics and visiOn Systems) will develop, on re-quest and fo,i a fee, customized, advancedcourses." /

*The five co intnies profiled are: 1) ComputerViaion. a ven-dor of compute Idded design systems (both hardware and soft-ware): 2) CAD M Inc.. a software-only vendor, most of whoseCAD software is sold to purchasers of IBM hardware: 3) Cin:cinnati Mile ion, Inc.. a producer of computer - controlledmachine t is. robots,and other products; 4) GCA, a producerof specia ed automated semiconductor equipment; and 5)Automat' , a vendor of custom-designed robotic and vision sys-tems. WI the exception of Cincinnati Milacron (CMI)whichwas fou ded in the 1880's and began producing computer-con-trolled/Machinery in the 1960's and 1970'sthe vendor firmsare relatively young companies. GCA and Computervision wereestab 'shed in the late 1960's; Automatix was created in 1980;and ADAM was incorporated in 1982.

" ew England Programmable Automation Custbmer Train-ing( case study. 1983.

26u

The expense of vendor training is anotherlimitation.* Specific strengths include: 1) ahigh level of responsiveness to customers'needs, 2) increasing amounts of attention todeveloping_ and utilizing instructional meth-odologies that attempt to combine flexibilitywith a systematic approach, and 3) an increas-ing emphasis on the need for in-p1;:-it instruc-tor training, manager training, and executiveseminars, all of which stress the systems ap-proach to manufacturing and design: The"systems approach," which takes the entiredesign and manufacturing process in a givenenvironment into accoant, is especially impor-tant in companies that now have or are in theprocess of building_1,an integrated CAD andCAM database;

Cooperative Indogtry-EdocatiOn-Prograins.While all of the educational programs coveredin the case study series have involved a degreeof participation from other sectors; only fiveof the programs could be characterized as jointventures in which governmeni. agencies and/orindustrial firms have assume i a high degreeof involvement in program. operation. Thoseare: 1) the Glendale high School CAD pro-gram; 2) the Glende coordinated ftinding pro-gram; 3) the Eastfield College _printed wireboard program; 4) WPI's Manufacturing En:gineering Applications Center, and 5) theTe:cas A&M integrated circuit design pro-gram.

numLer c he cooperative programs ex-amined have the potential to increase theeducation and/or research capacity of theacademic pzatners, especially those programsthat provide equipment and/or laboratory fa:

ies which the school could not otherwiseal! In addition, such programs can providethc adustrial partner with education and re=search services that iiichiat:;, is not organizedto provide (e.g.,_PA=related training deliveredin the context of a brOad=baSCO nclucation, and- _

*Vendors any! producers in son e cascs_cf:.ar_ volume dia:counts. group discounts. arhWnr free training sir :s with purchaseof their equpinent. But vendi.ir-provided training, while atieri-tial with init:ai purchasc of eauipment, la..omes to exponalVeas a continued s,nirce of instruction. Int.-.e case study sites eitarmed. neither vendors no-r-produr.--,mfeel that it is e substitutefor users training capacities.

a production-free envirorunentin which to con-duct *.pplications research). The majority ofthe joint programs also give the industrialpartner access to faculty and to potentialemployees, (i.e., the participating students)who are either specifically trained in occupa-tions in demand by the company or who have .

some familiarity with company proceduresand requirements through participation injoint research projects.

Needs, Problems; and Trends Commoh-toIndustry and Education Programs

SummaryNeither the industrial nor the educational

sector alone has fully met aWPA trainingneeds identified to date; nor has either solvedall of the major problems associated with thedelivery of such training. Some of those needsand proble:ns are, in fact, common to both in-dustrial training and the instruction deliveredin educational institutions.

Common NeedsLong- and Short-Term Strategies'. While in-

dustrial organizations need_trnining strategiesthat meet both short- and long-term needs tosupport PA implementation and expansionstrategies, educational institutions must planto meet short-term educational needs as bestthey can despite the difficulty of obtainingequipment and laboratory facilities. Texas In-Struments has recognized both needs and sup-pleyriSr; .s its it -plant training-activities withe .1i.ensive inyo;vement, in local elementary, sec-ondary, arid postF.kicondary education pro-grams, phis c.:::.4iperative arrangements withcolleges and universities in Texas and else-where." At the same time, educational institu-tionP must engage in long-term forecastingand itlanning consistent with their own educe:clonal Eand research goals and future industrialneeds: The University of Michigan, for exam-ple has s long-range goal of strengthening its-independent'research and deVelaPihent and en-gineering programs, while continuing to re-

"Tr :as Instruments case study. 1983.

Ch. 6=Education. Training, and Retraining issues 245

spond in the short term to changing indu§trialskills requirements."

Increased Internal Coordination. The needfor increased coordination between design andproduction departments in industries thateither have developed or plan to develop acommon CAD and CAM (or computertite-grated manufacturing) database is paralleledby the need, or educational institutions to in-crease the coordination among departmentsengaged in interdisciplinary research and/Orteaching activities. For example, BrighamYoung University is working to establishcloser ties between its engineetingjechnolo=gy, and science programs in light of the Com-mon effect§ of programmable automation Onthese courses of study, as well as the need foran interdisciplinary approach in many courses.

Increased communicatiomEnhanced com-munications networks -are needed not onlywithin individual schools and plants, but alsobetween industry and education; among com-panies engaged in producing, implementing,or expanding programmable automation; andamong schools offering PA stile:lies. In the caseof the Glendale, Calif., CAD/CAM TrainingProgram, State-level coordination and §pon,sorship provided both the impetus_ and thefunding resources necessary to giVeCollege and other colleges (Or, in some cases,consortia of colleges) participating in the ef-fOrt, the Opportunity to establish high-tech-nology programs.

_

The object of the State-level sponsors wasto demonstrate the feasibility of coordinatingboth funding sources and public and privateorganization efforts to support employmentand training projects_ which would also buildthe educational capacities of the participatingschobls. The State-level coordination was alsoa pilot test of the abilities_ of State agenciesto improve local responses to high-technologyedutatiOn and training needs by pooling andcoordinating their resources. On the local level.the success of the Glendale program in meet-ing its goals was aided by the 'previously es-

"Uniersity of Michigan case study, 1983.

tablished linkages between the college, the Pri-ate InchAtry Council (PIC), and local busi-ness and industry.

In addition, prospective 4udents and work-ers -need to be informed about the specific pro=grams of in particular schools and thepresent and future skill requirements of the'workplace. There are organization§lhat gatherand compile information on programmable au=tomation and other high-technology curriculawhich. can be used by _students or workersplanning further education.* What=appears tobe needed, however, is a national Mechanismfor tapping the resources of the already ex-isting organizations and gathering informa-tion from schools and industries that may notyet be included in the numerous studies andunofficial networking done by existing orga-nizations. As important as gathering informa-tion on curricula, training_ methodologies,research, equipment needs, local problems, andlocal solutions is a mechanism for publicizingthat information to teachers, prospective stu-dents, and workers who may not even knowof the existence of established information or-ganizations. A well-publiciz national com-munications network wou ; enable studentsto make informed choices 6, schools that meettheir individual needs. It,C uld = so make cur=ricular materials from a :. iety of sourcesavailable to schools and induStrial trainingdepartments.

Exchange of Expertise Between Educationand Industry._The. curriculum-developmentand teaching expertise of instructors in col-leges _and_universities can be of help to in-dustrial trainers facing the onset of increasedin-plant classroom and laboratory training for

4uogrammable automation. Similarly, colleges

ti

*Numerous professional societies such as the Society forMtuurfacturing Engineers and Computer..Aided ManufacturingInternational=enable professional engineers to exchange infor-mation on state-pf-the-art techniques and problems. In addi-

engineering education associations and vocational train-ing societies spread information among educators and trainers:Conferences such as that held by Brigham Young Universityfor universities engaged in PA teaching and research also help.As wide- reaching as these organizations may be, however, theyare still liiiiited in that not all trainers and educators can af-ford the time or receive the funding to attend meetings:_

262

_ 24C' Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment. Education, and the Workplade

rRODuuT

VIALPRIALSMANUFACTURINS

77411/..7../NE. macPKOPUErIM

This is a scale model (Inset) of the group technology cell that will be a part of BYU's "CAM Mini-Lab:" The model

was built- in the University't Research Laboratory (see caption below)

Brigham Young University's Engineering TechnologyDepartment is creating a "CAM MiniLab"a scaled-down version

of a highlautomated manufacturing facilityfor use with students enrolled in "Computer-Integrated Manufacturing"

and. other courses offered through BYU's DesignTechnology and Manufacturing Technology degree programs. The "Mini=

Lab" is expected to be completely operational in the next 8 months and will be located in the CAMSoftware Department.

Students are building most of the equipment forthe lab themselves,-including contiollersi_an automated storage and "retrieval device, and a group technology cell that includes a lathe, a mill, and a robot: Once completed, BYU hopes

to market the "Mini-Lab" concept to other schools of engineering and technology. For more information on BYU'sEngineering Technology Program, see app.. A

and universities can benefit from having theirstudents participate in simulated or actual in-dustrial projects.

As one model for such interaction, the spe-cific roles played by company and school rep-reSentatives in WPI's Manufactudng Engi-neering Applications Center (MEAC) projectsare as follows: Emhart Corp. supplied all the

equipment (including the robots themselvesand the peripheral equipment needed to devel-op the applications) and transported it to WPI;covered all major project cosl-s (which, asidefrom equipment, included administrativecosts, equipment maintenance, and a portionof WPI staff salaries); assigned a project man-ager to be responsible for the overall operationof the various applications projects; and as-

263

Ch. 6Education. Training. and Retraining Issues 247

signed other engineers and factory workers toaid in the research and development. WPI pro-vided laboratory and office space for tharesi-dent Emhart, staff; a project administrator;students, faculty, and "resident engineers"

.,,,,s_pecially hired to work on the MEAC projects;-.1workshops, demonstrations, and tours for

company personnel; and tuition-free course-work for participating engineers who wishedto take advantage of the college's educationalprogramincluding work toward M.S. andPh. D. degrees).

Top-Level Organizational or Institutional Sup-port and Self =Motivated Action by Instruc-tors.Well-planned and executed training andeducation requires-active support by corporatemanagement or school administrators. Thecorporate vice president who conceived of andinitiated the WPI manufacturing engineeringprogram enlisted top corporate support andacted as an arbitrator between the school andthe company and between Emhart corporateand divisional employees when the need arose.Apart from top-level support, the need for in-dividual instructors in educational institutionswho take action by developing curricula; mak-ing industrial contacts; and 'keeping them-selves abreast of the state of the art ismatched by the need in industry for trainingdirectors or managers who can convince topmanagement of the need for training to keeppace with PA expansion.

Flexibility. Both industry and educationneed the flexibility to incorporate the newtraining and education needs into traditionalpractices and procedures; This may; in someinstances,- require restructuring curricula ineducational institutions and restructuringtraining practices (or instituting new trainingprocedures) in industry. When the need for in-struction of production line personnel in theuse of programmable equipment arose at theGeneral Motors' "S" Truck Plant, for exam-ple, staff in the maintenance department wereidentified to serve as instructors and a perma-nent technical training group was formed."

"General Motors case study, 1983.

0,1 - 17 : 21. 3

Jointly Sponsored IndustryEducation Pro-grams. Joint programs with industry cansignificantly increase the capacities of educe-tional institutions to conduct programmableautomation education and research programs.While many industries have difficulties free-ing equipment or laboratory facilities for stu-dent use, others that have been able to do so(e.g., JPL, Singer. Librascope; and Emhart,)have seen a return on their investment that

s a v iety of formsranging from freecoursewor for company engineers, to assist-ance in industrial projects, to company-specif-ic training`of potential or current employees.Some far-seeing company representatives alsorecognize that by building the capacities of theschools; they are bettering their future chancesof hiring well-educated employees; Some alsobelieve that colleges can potentially save com-paniestrairiing dollars by delivering in-planttraining, In most cases, the companies wouldfirst have to train the college instructors intheir procedures and practices, but industrysupporters of contracts .7ith colleges for train-ing maintain that this s culd be less expensivethan company-operated training, and that ithas the added advantage of aiding industryand academia at the same time.

Common Problems_Lack of Adequate Resources.While the lack

of adequate funding, equipment, and labora-tory facilities for training is most notable_ inthe education sector, this problem has alsobeen observed in some vendor and user firms.A significant implication is that those.indus-tries having difficulties filling their own needsfor equipment, instructors, and facilities arehardly in a position to aid schools looking toindustry for equipment. The national crisis ineducation that-has been receiving increasingattention in the media and in numerous re-ports appears to be paralleled by-the less pub-licized problem of the lowsriertty,status oftraining in many industrial. organizatjons-,..JL-:,Nevertheless; as the successfully operatedindustry-education programs illustrate; re-sources (including equipment and laboratories

264

4 .,q Computorwod Miinotjettiong Automation: Employment. Education, and the Workplace

in industry and the instructional expertise ofeducators) can be shared; Federal; State, andlocal government agencies can help to facili-tate that sharing of resources_ by providing ad-ditional funds and by Creating linkages7-aswas done on both the State and latal levels inthe ilis;z:iice of California's coordinated fund-

ect;57

-ance to Change.A number of in-u. education representatives havepointed out that many individuals in their ownorganizations and institutions exhibit a strongresistance to the changes that may be broughtabout by programmable automation and otheremerging technologies; Not only individuals,but, entire organization w t' 's resistance.While over-respindinc- in an fil-consideredfashion is certainly a danger, the traditional-ly gradual change in education and trainingmakes a failure to resPond in time a moreprevalentand likelyproblem.

f,:.,ping Up With the Constantly ChangingState of the Art.While many educators havedifficulty keeping up with industrial advancesin technology, and while postsecondary educe-tional institutions as a whole face extremeficulty in keeping their laboratory equipmentup-to-date, industrial trainers (especially invendor firms) face Shriller difficulties in keep-ing up with software updates and new releasesof both software and hardware. The solutionCo this problem, as to so roans, others, is in-creased resources allotted to educational in-stitutions and indu§trial training organize-

. tions so that they can hire more trainers, cur-riculum specialiStS and, in the case of educa-tional institutions, more faculty to reduce thestrain on the departments esLa whole; The"solutibn," however, is a_problem in itself,since training resources appear to be scantyin many industrial firms; and funding_ is a_perennial problem in most schools.-

_

Finding and Keeping Instructors.7Highschool, college, and university instructors whohave develaped PA expertise are attractive toindustry, and must be dedicated teachers to

"Sec case study 5: CAD/CAM Operator Training Program,included in app. A to this report.

pass up the allure of higher industrial salarieMany potential instructors never consider pro-fessional academic careers for the same reason,leaving the university immediately after com-pleting their studies. Indii-strial training de-partments; especially in vendor firms, havesimilar problems. One potential solution liesin industry contracts with schools for ex-changes of experti-se, such as those describedearlier. This approach can lead to enhancementof the professional cOmpetente of instructors.

Common TrendSCross Training and/or Interdisciplinary

Studies Plus the Systerns Approach for Engi-neers and Managers.-_--Teehnical colleges andhigh schools stress the need for interdiscipli-nary coursework, especially in robotics andother programmable automation studies. Thisparallels the cross training of mechanics, elec-tronics technicians, and other technician-levelworkers and maintenance personnel in plantswhere union provi§ibn§_danat_preclude work-ers from crossing occupational trade bound-aries in the work performed. Insome unionplants that have such restrictions (e;g;; *hereelectrical maintenance personnel do not per-form mechanical maintenance functions), in-plant training courses often provide familiari-ty with those portions of the system not di-reedy the responsibility of the individual.mechanical or electrical maintenance worker.The systems approach to computer-integratedmanufacturing studies offered:by Same engi-neering schools is, perhatis_Paralleled by in-plant training in CAD and CAM networkingsystems and by systems overview courses foremanagers;

Technical Management Education and Train-ing.=-Overview courses_for- -managers arebecomingmore common, as are new master'sdegree programs in technical management forengineering personnel. Some of the univer-sities studied, such as the BYU, combinecoursework for a master's degree in businessadministyation with graduate-level engineer-ing or technology. courses (often focusingdirectly on programmable automation) to pro-duce trained technical managers.

26

Increased Attention to .the Relation-Ship Be-tween_E_ducation-and-Training And Productivi-tj7. This trend is related to the growing em-phasis on lifelong learning. A large number ofin-plant trainers and managers interviewedequated ongoing in-plant training with in-creased plant productivity. One of the majorselling points of vendor training is that ade-quate instruction is required to enable workersto '.make the most productive use of CADequipment and to keep CAM equipment oper-ating at peak_ efficiency. Trainers in theunion-operated training program studied were,perhaps, the most explicit: of all. Said one:"The only thing we have to sell are our skillsand knowledgethese must be pertinent if weare to continue to function as productive work-ers in a changing field."* Educators concernedwith the personal productivity of their stu-dents after they leave school emphasize the ne-cessity of continuing the learning process afterfornial education is completed. Programs of-fered by Worcester Polytechnic Institute, fore:,:ataple, are specifically structured to producestudenr.: who are capable of "learning to learnfor themselves in a priA:ssionally competitiveatmosphere.". According to one WPI repre-sentative, "the_ net result is that if the pro-

. gram succeeds in meeting its goals with indi-vidual students, those students who becomepractitioners have an infinite_ _half-life asengineers, instead of the currently predicted1 -year half-life."

Career Guidance andProgramma-ble Automation

Earlier in this chapter it was pointed outthat the increasing use of programmable auto-mation in manufacturing environments, alongwith other forces at work in the economy, iscausing individuals and employers to developnew expectations axe. requirements for serv-ices from the U.S. instructional system. Oneof the expectations_sharedbyindividualS andemployers alike is that there will be more com-prehensive educational and career guidance' *A large number of the members of the ptTrticWar MEW localStudied worked on a temporary or permanent basis for smallelectrical contractors, many of whom could not afford to pro-vide formal in-house training.

Ch. 6Education; Training; and Retraining Issues' 249

programs accessible not only to children andyoung people, but also to adults. As increaseduse is made of advanced automation in theplant and the office, skills requirements willchange and the emphasis on developing a base-line familiar; with advanced technologiesespecially the computerwill increase. Inturn, the variety of career options and modesof career preparation will change.

Given an era in which lifelong education.Willbe a necessity for most if not all participantsin the U.S. work force, there will be an increas-ing need for educational and career counsel-ing for adults. And in some cases, career coun-seling for adults may be an 'alternative tceducation. and training, as has already beendemonstrated with some displaced workerswho possess marketable skills. To date,-therehas been no research yielding specific recom-mendations for altering guidance and counsel-ing programs in accordance with the increasedpresence of advanced technologies in theAmerican workplace; Yet the potential for in-creased opportunities in technology-related ec,cupations and the importance of education andcareer guidance require that &discussion ofpossible changes to established programs beincluded in this examination of changing in-struction:_il issues.

Educational and Career Counseling inElementary and Secondary Education

Career guidance for elementary school stu-dents more often than not takes the form ofstructured, periodic classroom sessions de-voted to developing an awareness of careerchoices and options. On the secondary schoollevel, educational experiences designed to in-crease a student's awareness of possible careerchoices are usually known as "career explora-tion programs." School textbook publishers,and individual teachers, have developed ma-terials that may be integrated into establiShedcurricula, or that guidance personnel may titi-lize in special programs designed to stimulatecareer interests.

As career chc7ces in automated workplaceenvironments increase, preparation for thesecareers may require that decisions relating to

266

250 Computerized MandiaCturing Automation: Employment, and the Workplace

courses of study be made much earlier in a stu-dent's initial educational preparation. For ek-ample, a preliminary interest in technical orengineering careers may dictate an increasedemphasis on a science and mathperhapseven in the elementary gradeS. In JapaileSeschool systems; science and math educationare stressed from the lower elementary gradesand onward. In addition, science and math Cur=ricula are developed so that one level buildsclosely on the previous leve1.58 It will be im-portant that classroom materials used tostimulate career exploratibn reflect the

dlikeli-

hoo of more frequent change8 in careers, as_

well as the fUll spectrum of choices available.Given the relatively low participation rates ofminorities and women in technical and engi-neering professions, expoSUre of minority andfemale -children to career exploration materi-als will be especially important for futureachievement of workplace equality. It will alsohelP ensure that these children can make ca-reer deciSiOnS based on an examination of allpossible choices.

On the secondary level, the goal of careerguidance and counseling takes a differentform; First, there is more often than not a cen-tralized guidance function in the form of aguidance counselor or, in larger schools; aguidance department. For students who willenter the world of work directly after highschnol and for students who will go on to col-lege or some other education or training ex-perience, there are five career guidance needs:

An awareness that career planning isvitalA broad awareness of alternatives .Knowledge of a process of decision mak-ing . .

ReCerit, easily accessible banks of infor-mation andS "stematic treatment with iodividuali-zation.59

"National Science Board Commission on Pret`o'llege Educa-tion in Mathematics. Science and Technology, EducatingAineriCani; for the 21st Century (Washington, D.C.: NationalScience Board, September 1983):

'"JoAnn HarrisBowlsbey. "A .Flitorical Perspective,"Microcomputers and the School CouriSelor (Alexicrideia;Americaii Sch.101 Counselor Association, 1983).

Leaders in the field of career guidance suggestthat the work of school counselors will becomemore important as a result of increased use ofaclanced technologies in American Societyand the resulting need to encourage the per-sonal growth eequired to deal with an increas-'ingly complex and technical world.6° In addi-tion, information technology will play a great-er role in the guidance process itself, as micro-computers, video disks, teletext and videotextserve as vehicles for delivery of career guid-ance systems to supplement the role of thecounselor.6' A variety of computer-based guid-ance systems are already used by high schoolguidance counselors. Many counselors whohave used direct search and structured searchsystems=the two types of career databasescurrently availablehave found them to bevaluable resources.62

Career Guidance on the Postsecondary Level

Whether an individual enrolls in a degreeprogram or simply takes selected courses; thefocus of guidance programs in postsecondaryinstitutions is usually more on placement thanon examining career options. This focus hasbeen in keeping with increasing enrollmentSin specialized, professional+ educatibn pro-grams. However, as technological and econom-ic change forces individuals and institutionsto think more in terms of broad-based occupa=tional preparation rather thatn,specialization,there will be a greater need for career guidanceservices on the postsecondary level. Bartonpoints out that increases in adult enrollmentsand the growing need of adults for careercounseling; based in part on technological andeconomic change, will present new challengesto the educational community:

While there is increasing interest in adultsamong members of the counseling and guid-a:nee profession, that profession has mostlydealt with the young. There is quite a differ-

°?Cynthia Johnson, "The Future," MIcroccimptitets and the'School Counsdor_(Alexandna, Va.:- American School CotinelcirsAsS6ciation), 1983

"JoAnn Harris-Bowlsbey,-op. 1983."Laurence Shatkin, "The Electronic Counselor," Electronic

Learnjn-g, September 1983, pp. 75-77.

2

Ch. 6Education. Training. and Retraining Issues 251

ent set of issues involved in the problem ofpr9viding educational advisement and infor-mation to adults than there is in facilitatingthe movement of youth from high school tocollege. The colleges and universities havehad almost a single source frorn which to gettheir studentsthe secondary school. Infor-mation about admissions and courses was -*

funneled to students through high schoolcounselors who were the linchpins betWeenthe high school and the college. And a stand'-ardized test; the Scholastic Aptitude Test(SAT)at least from the college's stand-pointhelped to grade and sort prospectivestudents.. . . Potential adult students are not gatheredin any central place.. . . They often have veryspecific objectives, and need to know whatkind of education will enable them to reachthese objectives, and .where that educationcan be found in the community and at laa§tcost in money and Lune. People who givegood educational advice to adults have toknow about the constraints working adultsencounter. They must be briefed about em-ployment and avenues of advancement,about what employers require, in order to re-late an educational plan to an employmentoutcome."

Other Sources of Career Counseling for AdiiltsA variety of organizations and institutions

within the community now provide careercounseling services to adults who are partici-pants in the work force or who wish to enteror reenter the work force. In 1980; there werean estimated 7,991 commercial employmentestablishments operating in the United States.Some of :them specialize in particular fieldssuch as data processing or engineering, whileothers work with individuals interested in abroad range of career pursuits.64

Nonprofit organizations; such as communi-ty-based groups and churches; are becomingincreasingly act ve; particularly in periods ofhigh unemployment. National nonprofit orga-nizations also have been formed to assistindividuals in identifying job opportunities.

--"'Paul Barton, Worklife Transitions (Washington, D.C.: Na-

tional Institute for Work and Learning; 1982)."Data provided by the U.S. Department of Commerce.

For example, the National Center for Urbanand Ethnic Affairs recently formed a nationalinformation clearinghouse for use bYcommu-nity groups across tb,2 country for self-help jobcounseling programs to aid the unemployed.The Center's clearinghouse staff now offerworkshops to community leaders interested inestablishing self-help job counseling ceriterS.66

Other national nonprofit organizations areexamining career opportunities for particulargroups within the population. For example;Wider Opportunities for Women, Inc. (WOW);a Washington, D.C.-based organliatiiiii thatfocuses on developing nontraditional careeropportunities fir_ women, is now sponsoringa Women's Work Force Project; to identify pb-tential opportunities for women in high=teCh=nology industries.66

The Corporation for Technological Training;a nonprofit organization serving high-technol-Ogy employers and individual job seekers inMontgomery County, Md., has created a Tech-nical Occupations Employment Group that as-sesses industry skill requirements and Pro-vides testing, counseling, retraining, andplacement assistance on an as-neede_d basis.Given the potential variances in skill mixesamong high-technology and technology-inten-sive industries in different regions, such pro-grams that focus on the needs of particulargeographic areas or target populations mayincrease in numbers in the near-term future,provided there are available resources for theirestablishment and strong industry support.

As the need for educational counseling andcareer guidance increases because of expandeduse of PA in manufacturing, advanced tech-nologies in other types of work environments;and other factors, the need increases for cur-rent, reliable information on occupationaltrends and occupational preparation. Thisneed for more efficient means of organizingand updating occupational information sug-gests the need for greater use of microcomput-

NCUEA Building Blocks, winter 1983."Bridging the Skills Gap: Women and Jobs in a High Tech

World (Washington. D.C.: Wider Opportunities for Women.1983).

26

252 Computer, 2ed Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

ers and other technologies in the counselingprocet 8.67

Job Counseling, Outplacement, andRetraining for Displaced Workers

Many semiskilled and skilled workers whohave lost their jobs in automobile, steel, andother heavy manufacturingIndustries, or whoare on indefinite lay-off with slim prospects for

ever returning to their former jobs, are look-ing for new jobs within the manufacturing orthe service sector. In addition, due to both theincreasing use of programmable automationand economic changes, the jobs of many cur-rently employed semiskilled and skilled work-ers are at risk.

Unless these individuals are willing to takelower paying; lower skilled jobs, many willneed to be retrained or to enhance their pres-ent skill levels so that they can compete foravailable skilled joba. A few companies,unions, State universities, and community col-leges now offer instructional programs de-signed with displaced workers in mind. A fewuniversities and community colleges have be=gun to offer free courses to the unemployedin order to assist_ them in upgrading theirkills.68 However, other instructional programs

are a "force fit." Existing curricula and in-structional methods may be inappropriate forthe skill levels of displaced workers or for usewith older adults. Often, too, skill levels ofenrollees are not assessed initially, nor is place-ment of enrollees after completion of trainingguara.nteed.69 As a result; participation ratesare often low.

In the past, few retraining efforts for dis-workers_havebeen. sponsoredby indus

try, for a variety of reRsons, including: the lackof local alternative career opportunities, forwhich instruction could be provided; workers

"Harris-Bowlsbey, op. tit:, I983:' ""Free Courses Offer Jobless a 2d Chance;" Mew York 'nines,

June 28, 1_483."For a detailed account of one such program see "Retrain.

ing'83?" Washington Post Nov. 6 7, 8, and 9 1981 The seriesdescribes a technician training program for former productionline workers at General Motora- Southgate Plant in southernCalifornia.

who resisted retraining in hopes that theywould be called back to their old jobs; and_theinability of companies closing plants to affordthe cost of retraining displaced workers.7° Todate, most of the retraining programs eatab-lished have been paid for with Fedez-al funds.For example, the Trade Adjustment Assist-ance Program was the key funding source forthe relocation programs of the 1970's. Specialretraining projects for indiViduals affected bymassive layoffs were funded through Depart-ment of Labor d;:cretionary granta.7' In recentyears, State and local governments, throughtheir economic development agencies, havebegun to establish State training systems andskills centers. These centers aim to attract newindustries to their geographic areas by pro-viding them with a pretrained work force.They are often sources of training for displacedworkers who meet entry eligibility require-ments:12

The following factors complicate the processof providing retraining for displaced workers:1) many have been out of school for a numberof years and are uncomfortable with class-rooms and instructional approaches designedfor use with younger and less experiencedstudents; 2) many have families and feel theycannot participate in education and trainingprograms unless they also receive some formof stipend for living expenses or payment forwork performed while engaged in on-the-jobtraining; and 3) many need specialized jobcounseling and placement assistance in orderto determine how best to utilize their presentskills in preparing for new careers and in seek-ing out new employment opportunities.

Retraining programa established with the_special needs of displaced workers in mindprograms IiiwTucli their currezit skills andknowledge base are taken into accountarecritical if the United States is to minimize the

"Jeanne P. Gordus, Paul Jai-ley, and Louia Ferman, PlantClosings and Econemic Dislocation (Kalamazoo,' Mich.: W.E.Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, 1981L

"Worker Adjustment to Plant Shurdotvhs mid Mass Layoffs:An Analysis _of Program Experience and Pelle), Options(Washington. D.C.: National Alliance of Business, March 1983):

"Ibid.

26:4

Ch. 6Education, Training, and Retraining }sues 253

problems of worker dislocation and increaseduse of PA on the manufacturing work force.Often, pretraining programs are required toaddress basic skills deficiencies or to reinforcebasic skills, such as math, or to reinforce skillsthat have not been utilized in the jobs previ-ously held by these workers.

Whether or not retraining is required forcontinued participation in the work force, thetwo types of services that most displacedworkers need are job counseling or outplace-ment and retraining. These are discussed inmore detail below.

Job Counseling/OutplacementThere are many similarities between the

needs of displaced salaried workers for jobcounseling aTid placement assistance and theneeds of displaced hourly production lineworkers. Both groups require assistance inassessing their marketable skills and in identi-fying job opportunities in which their skillSmay be utilized. If new skills need to be devel-oped, both salaried and hourly workers needassistance in identifying appropriate sourcesof training and retraining. However, there isa marked difference in the ability of hourly/workers to " . .. articulate value rather thanneed in representing themselves to prospec-tive employers: "79 For example; in respondingto the question; "Why should I hire you?" theanswer given by the former hourly employeewill often be; "Because I need it to supportmy family," rather than "Because I have thefollowing skills. Organizations that have pro-vided job counseling services to productionline workers have noted that former hourlyemployees are frequently unable to project apositive image of themselves and tend to thinkof themselves only in terms of the:, Frnviousjobs. Tom Jackson, whose consulting firm hasworked with hourly employees displaced fromthe transportation, metalworking, electronics,petrochemical, and retail sales industries, de-scribes the prithary goal of job counseling andoutplacement for these workers in this way:

"Interview with Torn Jaekson, chairman, The Career Develop-ment Team, Inc.. March 1983.

The fundamental issue here is to go beyondjob title to the individual and the skills he orshe possesses; as well as the qualities; Our jobis to help the individual to reestablish his/herfundarriental versatility and, through it, toadapt to change, The qualities that are uniqueto an individual are the forces that embodythat person's ability to develop new skills.This is what we so often miss when we justlook at the job a person has performed; ratherthan looking at the totcl person. Unfortunate-ly, our educational institutions and many em-ployers reinforce this limited view of the

Job Clubs and Seminars. One of the mostsuccessful forms of job counseling and out-placement for former production line workershas been the job club, an organized group ofunemployed workers who meet frequently toclisc\uss and reinforce each other's job seeking

"Interview with Tom Jackson, op. cit., March 1983.

Raymopd 0. was mployed for 17 years as a ResearchAssistant_withee 'Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp. inPittsburgh, PayWhen he lost his job, he enrolled in theRobotics In allation and Repair Program developedespecially or displaced, steel workers by theCommunit College of Allegheny County, in close co-operation ith the Westinghouse Corp., a producer ofrobotics equipment. Now Mr. O. attends classes 5

night a week and works for a contractor duringthe day installing robots

2 70

254 Computerized Manufacturing A-WOMahon: Employment; Education, and the Workplace

efforts, Job clubs are usually limited to 25 peo-ple or less, Sessions are devoted to job counsel-ing and obtaining job leads, often with the helpof professioital counselors, and to practicinginterviews. The other common type of jobcounseling fOr former hourly production per-sonnel iS job Search seinin ,:lelivered bytrained consultants." Goodye.i.,. 'Tire & Rub-ber Co., in conjunction with plant_ closings in

Pa., and Los Angeles in 1980,was the first U.S. firm to provide job counsel=ing and outplacement to hourly productionline workers, in addition to salaried adminisztrative and supervisory personnel," Six caseStudies of plant closings prepared for use inconjunction with a 2-day tenfrence on plantclosings sponsored by the Department ofLabor in 1981 all stressed the importance ofgetting displaced workers actively involved inreadjustment procesSes, including counselingand motivation sessions.77

Other Sources of Counseling and PlacementAssistance.- -The U.S. Employment Servite,established under the Wagner-Peyser Act of1933, has over 2,800 offices across the Natidri.While the Employment Service offerS all tin=employed persons access to job listings andassistance in matching their skills to availablejob opportunities, the counseling and place-ment services it provides are extremely limitedin' This is due_partly to redefinitionsover the years by the U.S. Department of La-bor of the primary clientele for the Employ-

, ment Servite._ For example, in 1965, the em-phasis of the Employment Service was to beon working with the "employable"individ-uals who already possessed fairly marketablejob skillS, but Who needed access to listingsof ai,ailable jobs._ By 1971, however; the focusof Ethplbyinent Service efforts was changedto working with those who were viewed by em-ployers as "least employable " individuals;lacking basic math, reading, and languageSkills, and possessing physical or personal

"National Alliance of Business, _op. cit., 1983."Torn Jackson, Industrial Outplacement at GoodyearPart

2: the Consultant's Viewpoint," The Personnel Administrator,March 1980, pp. 46-48.

"Plant Ciosings: What Can Be Learned From Best Practice(Washington, D.C.: U.S Department of Labor, 1982).

characteristics perceived as barriers to ern-ployability. With this shift in focus; most ofthe counseling provided by Employment Serv-ice personnel was received by those who wereleast "job-ready," or who had mental or emo=tional problems.78

Given the changes in the designated audi-ence for the Employment Service over theyears since its creation,_ it is difficult toestimate how useful a tool it has been to dis-placed workers. Under the Trade Act of 1974;legislation designed to provideradjustmentand relocation assistance to workers displacedas a direct result of foreign competition, theEmployment Service is designated to adniiii-irster emplOyment services for the Trade Re=adjustment Assistance Program (TRA). ForfiStal year 1981, the Department of Labbi.ported that of the 79;000 workers registeredWith the Employment Service under TRA,Only 7,000 were placed in jobs as a result ofEmployment Service assistance."

The Employment_ Service `(called the JObSerVite in some States) has been designatedto provide counseling and placement assist=ante to displaced workers under Title III ofthe newly enacted Job Training PartnerShipAtt (JTPA). However; emPloyers haVe beenreticent over the years to /list available, jobopenings with the Employment Service/JobService, partly because of the perception that,since its establishment, the agency has han-dled predominantly/jobs With the lowest payand, the highest turnover," These conditions,unless corrected, may influence how effectivea,role the Job Service can play in counselingand assisting_ displaced ,workers eligible forassistance under JTPA.'81

CETA and -JOE, Counseling/Outplacement.Displaced workers were among the targetgroups eligible for assistance under Title II-C of the Comprehensive Employment and

"Barton, op: cit., 1982._"Employment and Training Report of the President, 1983."Barton op. cit., 1982 testimony: U.& Chamber of Com-

merce; National Alliance of Business, Committee for Economicin hearings before the Joint Economic Commit-

tee, Sept. 16, 23, 26, 1983."National Alliance of Business, Mardi 1983.

271

Training Act (CETA); Under this section ofthe act, workers displaced through ;mass lay-offs or plant closings were eligible for retrain-ing, but only if they had received officialnoticeof layoff within 6 month of their day of appli-cation and if the local CETA-prime sponsorcould certify that, there was little or no oppor-tunity for these Workers to find employmentin the same or an equivalent occupation withinthat geographic area. Given the complexity ofthe eligibility requirements, and also the 6.5;percent limit on retraining for those who didnot meet standard income eligibility require-ments, the infrequency of advance notice ofplant closings, and the overall mission ofCETA to serve the economically disadvan-taged, few CETA grime sponsors used TitleI I-C moneys to retrain displaced workers." Inaddition; while the intent of the CETA legisla-tion was for counseling and placement assist-

Ch: 6Ejuc-ation; ana Retraining

ance to be provided by local. CETA offices ordesignated contractors; pressures on localCETA-personnel to "train and place" resultedin little time for bona fide counseling andplacement assistance."

In summary; from available evidence; it ap-pears that job search counseling and place-ment assistance have been effective tools inassisting displaced workers in improving theirmorale and self-image; and in developing ade-quate job search skills; The most effectivesources of job counseling and outplacementservices utilized- to date with displaced work -.ers have been job clubs and job search semi-nars delivered by trained consultants. How-ever, in most instances, these services weredelivered at the discretion of individualemployers and have not been made widelyavailable.

"Barton, op. 1982.

Education and Training in Europe and JapanAn education system in any country is _a re-

flection of the values and traditions of thesociety it serves. As such, it is difficult to com-pare and contrast one national instructionalsystem with another without making allow-ances for cultural and economic differences.Other distinctions in education systems, suchas the ratio of public to private institutions,further complicate the process. Over the pastyear, a number of national studies have beencritical of the U.S. education system and haveidentified.attributes of instructionalprogramsin Japan and Europe to be considered for adop-tion in this country; This section of the chapterwill examine some of the similarities and dif-ferences between the United States; Europe;and J span in approaches taken tothat serves as a f3undation for PA,relateelskills development or that develops skillo re-quired in automated manufacturing.

1

Summary of Comparative Data

In the mid-1970's, the National Center forEducation Statistics_ (NCES) reviewed andsummarized findings from several studies thatcompared education in the United States withthat of nine other countries: Canada, France,Germany, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Nor-way, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. NCESfound that for the age group 25 to 64, theUnited States ranked first in adult educationalattainment, with an average of 11.1 years offormal instruction. The United Kingdom wasnext highest, at 10.2 years of formal school-ing; but closely followed by Japan; at 10 ;0years (see fig: 21); By 1976, in all countries ex-cept Canada and the Netherlands; adult malesaged 15 and over had slightly higher rates ofeducational attainment than females in thesame age group. However, by 1980 -81; the

272

256 Computerized Aila;-.dfactoring Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

Figure 21.Comparison of Years of Formai Instruction Completed by Adults

TotalCount ly education received by age 15

Compulsory eduL at ion

Canada 9 7

hr ante 9 1

Germany (F. R.) 9.2

!Lily 6.4

Japan 10.0

Notherl,incis 8.5

Norway 8.8

sv otori 8.7

Kirlodotti 10.2

United 5t.itw.: 11 1

Age

EducationEducation _received received

at age 15-18 atter age 18

I.

,), 1-1

-C

5 .6 7 8 9

Grade completed

SOURCE Nanonat Center tor Edu&itiOn SW)ttcs: 1976.

numbers of 18-year old men and Women in theCernrr-wiity of Teri* countries who were full-tirr. had increased by 36 percent for

.,-4 %.' NCES found education was a ma-jor gaw:i atn6ntxpenditur6 in all he nationsexamined, but Canadian expenditures repre-sented the highest percentage of GNP (6.5/.closely _followed by the Netherlands (6.3 per-cent). U.S. expenditures in the year examined(1973) represented only 5.1 percent of GNP,while in Japan (for 1971), education-relatedpenditures amounted to only 3;0 pereent Of

GNP (see fig. 22); During the the period 1960;70, the United States had less growth in high=er education enrollments not attributable topopulation growth than any of the other COun;tries studied; Immediately prior to the periodexamined, the United States had greater ratesof higher education enrolitherit growth thanany of the other nations (see table 54).

Vocational TrainingA 1982 comparativestudy of vocational training systems in the

*Fecleral .Republic of Germany. France, Itajy, The Nether-lands. Belgium, Luxembourg; United Kingdom, Ireland, Den-mark, and Sweden.

""Education and Training," EirroStat Statistical Bulletin;Oct. 28; 1982.

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ,20

112th 4th8th

Federal Republic of Germany, Austria, Korea,Taiwan; Spain; Holland,_Japari, Liechtenstein,Great Britain, Ireland,'Portugal, Switzerland;and the United States, found that vocationaleducation is not highly regarded in these coun-tries relative_to its importance in producingskilled labor for continued industrial develop-ment. The vocational programs of the coun-tries examined varied considerab13- in scope;enrollment levels, and available resources; Forthe most part, countries with long-establishedvocational training tended to consider appren=ticeship as a broad-based foundation. for life-long, skills improvement; In contrast, nationsthat required rapid skills development in orderto meet the needs of accelerated rates of Indus=trial growth seemed to favor shorter term, ape=cialized instruction delivered by vocationaltraining schools or by industry personnel atmanufacturing sites.86

An important measure of the quality of Mi.=

tial vocational preparation (secondary level) is

"Comparison Among the Different Vocational Training$ystems in the Countries Participating in the i.B. W.; Interna-tional Organization for the PromotiOri of Votational Trainingand the International Competitions of Vocational Training forYoung People; July 1982.

27

Ch. 6-Education, Training, and Retraining Issues 257

Figure 22.-Comparison of Public Expenditures for EducationCurrent publicexpenditures

$6.150.000.000 Canada. 1971

$4,200,000,000 France, 1970

$5.030.000.000 Germany (F.R.). 1970

$6.890.000.000 Japan. 1971

$2.340.000.000 14etherlands. 1971

$740.000.000 Norway. 1972

$2.170.000.000 Sweden, 1972

$4.250,000.000 United Kingdom, 1970

$69,400,000:000 United States; 1973

SCUPCE National Center lor Education Statistrds, 1976

Percent of GNP

3.0

127

3.0

.4

5.2

6.5

6.3

0 -2.5 5.0 7 5

Table 54.-Growth of Full-time Enrollment in Education, by Level in Selected Countries, 1960.70

Country

Annual average compound growth rate

In school -age population In enrollment

In enrollment notattributable to.

- population_cbangeSecondary - Higher Secondary Higher eiOndarly- Higher

Canada 3.3 / _4.4" - 6.r 11.3 2.6 6.6France 1.3' / 4.1 3 t" 11.2 2.5 7.1Germany (F.R) 1.4 -2.1 3.3 7.3 1.9 9.6Italy -OZ 01 5.7 9.5 6.0 9.4Japan -1.3 2.0 -0,2 9.0 1.1 6.9Netherlands 0.4 ; 3.4 2.8 7.8 2.4 4.3Norway 0.9 4.2 NA 9.4a NA 4.7Sweden -1.3 3.4 3.5 NA_ 4.9 NAUnited Kingdom -0.1 -' 2.4 1.2a 10 Oa 1.3a 7.40United Statesb 2 8 - 4.1 3 1 8.3 0.3 4.0aEstimated.b1959.70

5OURCE: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. Paris, France, Educational Statistics Yearbook, 1975, volt 1, sec.

the' ability of those who have participated todemonstrate the mastery of skills -y The Inter-national Skill Olympics, sponsored by the In-ternational Organization for the Promotion ofVocational Training, are designed to provideyoung people representing 14 member nationswith opportUnities to gain recognition for ex-cellence in the skilled trades.

)

The United States has participated in six international competitions since 1973. As illus-trated in figure 23, the United States has haelthe lowest average level of perfornrancdthe first five competitions,._with a score. asmuch as 24 points behind Korea. and Japanand as much as 15 points_behind Switzerland,

'Austria,Germany, and France. A though the

274

"5

25h' r,if Automation: Employment. Education. and the Workplace

Figure 23.Results of the International SkillsOlyMpics

roc, trrmuilicii of riatio..al cc)rni)etilcir::cortrpr,(Wort since 1975

CountryAustriaFranceGermanyJapanKoreaLiechtensteinSwitzerlandTaiwanUnited Statet8eigiumIreland_WitieigridS

Spain___united Kingdom

rj 60 70 80 90 Sr bee

67.8263.5066.3073.8078.2069.0068.5068.3053.6055.5857.2061.7053.80608058.30

r PortIc o;rhor, n the I Itertrahonal,,r Ar110/1Cii I983

United States ranked first in the auto mechan-ics competitions and third in the demonstra-tion of electronics skills (see fig. 24), it heldlast place in the precision machining, welding,and construction trades. In assessing U. S.performance, an OffiCial of the Vocational In-dustrial Clubs of America, In (VICA) hasnoted that the countries who placed highestin the International Skills Olynir cs includeour toughest industrial competitors. VICA at-tributeS the state of preapprenticeship tradesskills in the United States, at least in part, to" . . . an adversarial relationship that has de-veloped between government; industry, laborand education regarding the production of ahighly skilled, basic trades work force. "d6

"I larold Lewis. leeport on Participation in the Inte=r-natiomilSkill 01 y Triples. presented at theArnerican Vocational Asseicia-

thin Annual cotifotenc-e-, December 1983.

Figure 24.Results of the International SkillsOlympics

Electronics

Country 50 60

Central EurJpeanUnited K:rigdOrriand ri

Othe1 European---.A.siari -

UnliedSlates

--,, _ 69.65-

59:08--,.,, o3

, o1

SOL-rGE _13 room or; Frartrcroat.on r 7 the Interoat.r, .Orvr,orcs VICA 9831

Featilie§ of the Japanese Education andTraining System With Relevance forP&.3grammable Automation

This Section highlights aspects of educationand training systems in Japan that lay thegroundwork for or develop skills directlyrelated to programmable automation.

The Japanese education system is knownthroughout the world for its rigorous cUrricu:himparticularly on the elementary and 'Sec;ondary levels, In a recent book on Japanesehigh schools; Thomas P. Rholen of the Centerfor Japanese Studies, University of California,estimated that as a result of an acceleratedelementary and secondary curricula, " . . . theaverage Japanese high school student has theequivalent basic knowledge of the averageAmerican College graduate." One in ten Jap-anese stUdentS do not finish high school, com-pared with one in four Ainericans.87

The Japanese education _system was re:formed after World War II. During this peri-od; many new high schools, colleges, and,universities were established and educationthrough the junior high school level becamemandatory for all citizens. This change in themandatory education requirement and thebroadening of access to instruction was a ma-jor contributor to Japanese industrinlization.88EmPhaSis on science and math education be-gins in the early elementary grades: Threehours each week of math instruction in firstgrade is gradually increased to 6 hours eachweek in grades 4 through 6. Science educationis provided by elementary school teachers whodid not specialize in science but who have at-tended in-service training programs in govern=ment-established science education centers.While the .goal of science education in elemen=tart' schools is to create a positive attitudetoward science; curriculum is more structuredon the junior and senior high levels. The Jap-anese Ministry of Education, under authori-:,y of the Science Education Promotion Law

'Thomas_P:- Rholen, Japan's High Schools (UniVersity ofPre88,_19831.

"Y. Oshima, "Recent Trends of Manufacturing Technologyin Japan," Automatica. vol. 17, No. 3, May 1981; pp. 421.440.

r..M. 6Education. Training, and Retraining Issues 259

of 1953; has established a program to improveelementary and secondary school science edu--cationa program that includes grants to in-dividual schools for the purchase of scienceequipment."

Japanese students who go on to high schoolenter one of a number of programs: general,en ;ineering; agriculture, or commerce.°° Ex-aminations are required for high school en-trance and the scores received on these examsdetermine each inctividttal's occupational andsocial status: Vocational schools are availableto students who do not achieve high rankingon high school entra: -xams, The entire highschool curriculum is geared to preparing stu-dents for highly competitive, college and uni-versity entrance examinations."

Shortages of technical and engineering in-structors on the junior college, college and uni-versity levels have resulted in few roboticscourse offerings in Japan. IT: addition, someuniversities do not consider robotics an appro-priate topic for inclusion in engineering cur-ricula. As a result, engineering graduates oftenrequire additional instruction before they areprepared to work in automated manufactur-ing facilities. However, some educational in-stitutions that are not under the jurisdictionof the Japanese Ministry of Education are be-ginning to offer robotics progrtuns in responseto the needs of Japanese industry."

Japanese manufacturers now operate a feweng-ineering schools of their own. These insti-tutions offer programs in robotics operationand maintenance, as well as industrial engi-neering programs that include robotics in-struction." in Jal-,an, industry assumes re-sponsibility for L :zing and retraining its em-ployees. Within firms where "lifetime emp:oy-

"US. Science and Engineering Education and Manpower:Background; Supply and Demand; and Comparison With Japan,the Soviet Union and West Germany. report prepared by theCongressional Research Service for the Suocommittee on Scionce. Research and Technology, House Committee on Scienceand Technology. April 1983.

"Souji Inagidti, Education and Thdiring:Comment FromJapan, paper presented at the 13th ISIR/Robot 7.

"Rholen. op. cit., 1983."Inagaki, op. cit.. 1983.9'Inagaki. op. cit.. 1983.

ment" is the official policy ;industry- providedinstruction is a necessity; since the majorityof new employees recruited have just com-pleted their formal education: The amountand type of training and retraining receivedby an individual is highly dependent on thestage of the worker's career and; to a lesserextent; on expected tenure: Training for entry-level and young workers is more extensive andformal than instruction for older employees;although experienced workers automaticallyreceive formal training upon promotion."

A study conducted by the Japanese Minis-try of Labor on the impact on employment ofrobotics and NC equipment in 10;000 Japa-nese manufacturing facilities found that over60 percent of the companies had initiated spe-cialized training programs in conjunction withadoption of these technologies:96 However;shortages of technical_ instructors are an im-pediment to the establishment of PA-relatedtraining in many Japanese firms, just as theyare for U.S. companies. Producers of PA equip-ment and systems provide some training, butthere is no information available on its natureor content. As is the case in the Unit6d States,small man:ifacturing firms do not have thetime or the resources to provide PA-relatedinstruction to employees."

Training Offered by a Japanese Firm in the.Unit&d States.Training programs offered byNissan Motor Manufacturing Corp. U,S.A.'arerepresentativCof employee education andtraining provided by the Nissan Corp. inJapan. Nissan U.S.A.'s truck manufacturingfacility in Smyrna, T3nn., is one of the most;automated of.Nissan's plants, with 219 robotsand other forms of automated equipireni andsystems in use in body assembly, stamping,

painting operations; and a "just-in-time"parts delivery system.

The training system adopted at NissanU.S.A. is one manifestation of the distinctive

"r,:aul H. :^ron, The ffrbot Sect ell) Japan: An Update (NewYork: Daiwa Securities America, Inc., Sept. 7, 1983).

gsjames A. Orr, et al., U.S. Japan ComparativeEmploymnt adjustment (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department--of Labor-Japan Ministry of Labor, November

rAron; op. cit., 1985. -_"1nagalti.. op. cit., 1983.

276

260 Comrilte.1,.07 hi rrert.eturinq Autcandtion Employm.

approach being taken to plant management.In keeping with a streamlined; five-level Mari:agement structure, an interest in- encouragingemployee participation in_plant decisionthak-ing and the need to move employees to differ-ent_ stations in the facility to improve prOduc-tiVity, Nissan U.S.A. has developed specialMaintenance technician; manufacturing tech-hiCian, and supervisor training programs forits personnel. Technician training is designedto develop multiple skills and produce an erl-ployee who can perforrri a number of differentjobs and work effectively as a member of ateam, I m5tructors are Nissan personnel,_pro-fessors from nearby universities, or trainingconsultants, Some of the supervisory person-nel were sent to ,Japan for instruction lastingfrom 1 to 4 months that Wiz:di..Place in selectedNissan plants prior- to the opening of theSmyrna facility in 1983. Production line per-sonnel who are s.i-OL .:htilelans or supervisorsreceive a minima f 21 hours_ of generalinstruction; then Iluch as 20 hours of job:specific training body assembly.*

*Note ..hat the Japanese use the term "' relativelybroadly. applying it to individuals de..,.:ated prodtittionworkers by Amcricans.

,ration. and the Workplace

Nissan U.S.A._ has opened a 30;000 squarefoot; onsite training facility that containsclassrooms and a shop_ area that has demon-stration Models of all robots in use in the plant,a paint buoth and a maintenance area." Fig=

ures 25, 2:3. and 27 illustrate the training proc-esses for these training;7,rograms; frOin em-ployee selection for przertTioyinent trainingtlirciwi'h Certification. T.n.:itructiori offered atthe Smyrna plant may be a reflection of themore extensive use of programmable automa-tion by Japanese firms to date, or it Mayim-ply be a reflection c a different approach totraining for_ prooui..ion line petSehtiel thanthat taken by American companies.

"" Nissan Trains-U.S. Workers in Japan." Automotive News.May_31,_ 1982; address by Marvin-T: Runyon; President andChief Executive Officer, Nissan Motor _Manu-facturing_Corp.U.S.A. before the Foreign Correspondents Chib of Japan,

Japan, Mar. 29;1983: tnateri; provided by Larry P..;it7 Director, Personnel Development, Nissan (i.S.A.; "Strin-

;.- it Screening, Training by Nissan, American Metal Market.alworking News. June 6, 1983.

2-AiSe:Sment: fliarqeity of the U;S; Ins#40ional System toMeet the Challenge Posed by Programmable AutOmation

Cuirent Instructional Capacity

There is L'Ale information on the nuinber ofeducational institutions with course offeringSor full-blownct.,.:1-icula for programmable auto=

mation, with the ey_-2ption of ro7.)Otics andcomputer graphics. 116 iotics Internatioial, anaffiliate groT: of the Society for Manufactiit-ing Engineers, conducted a survey of over2,000_trade and technical schoelS, communi-ty colleges, and universities to identify robot -:Ls training and education activities in:NorthAmerica, Findings indicated_that, in the sum-mer of 1982, there were 27 institutiorig'thatlisted robotic'- degrees or among theirprograms and 74 more that -Offered robotics

cOUrg8-.99 Table 55 is a listing of the resond-ing institutions categorized by type of pro-gram and w:ithin tyi.es; by kind Of instkution.Inc amount of educitionalactivity related torobotics probably reflects the large amount ofattention this form of PA has received _overthe past few years more than it does thr degreeOf sophistication cum:fitly found in roboticscurricula,

Cali...Liter Graphics World, a monthly, cornmercial journal that tracks advanceS in corn-`piiter graphics software and applications, con-

""Directary of North American Robotics Education and 7'rain-,ing Roboties International. 1983.

otaucarlon, tra (wig, ana 1-retraining issues zoi

Figure 25.Maintenance Technician Training at issen

Selection_for pre.ernployment

trainingOrientation

rPreeroPlayment

trainingEmptoyeeselection

State of Tennesscie Welcome Electrical/ Technicalcutena Background and electronic. Skills

history Hydraulic/ assessmentNissan c.rilorin Benefits and pnedrriat IC 2.opervisory

advantages Welding skillsInn., viO%-itiS E,rollmen! . General assessment

Produc. benchfamiliari B_asicrn_achinezatron technologyPersonnel Basic machiningintroduction

Jobinstruction

training

reeleriatisunriel with skills-niCosSai y to tf,i1,1

[ Machineinstallation ,

debugging .

Specializedtraining

On the floor taskcertilication onspecific equipmentand systemsProvide versatinly.training

scottcr Motor N anufp.:,-41,,, Corporation U S A

Continuedbasic

training

SpeCific iachine or Electricalrelec;tionic .J.:3.panese preventivecontrols training flydrauliitioneumatic maintenancePresent 2.d in training Welding 7roCedureScenter or vendor Cenerai 1 ench Equipmentfacility. Basis_ machne familiarizationPresented ti. technology Specific machineyendoi/NMMC . tail Basic machining trainingProvidi! ,iirsatilily Piovide versatility Ouality'circlestraining training 'amiliarization

-T-__ Leader _ _certification

MaLnieruindetechnician

certification

ducted a survey in 1983 designed to identifyuniversities that offer the following types ofcomputer graphics instruction:

computer graphics research,aM -nztion,CAD- and CAM,computer-aided instruction,design/architecture,design/graphic arts,i'md resource,medicine, andother.

Results of the survey indicate thut 84 univer-sities in the United States: rs,d TIVS uniVereltiegin Canada provide one #.4 mor types of com-puter graphics instruction in z ..Pir engineer-ing; drafting; computer scienne; or art pro-grEms. However; the survey did not ev.i.luatethe relative quality of these programa'

m"Survey of University Computer Graphics InstrucLion,"Comp, uter Graphics World, vol. 7, No. 1, January 1984, pp. 54,56, 58.

27

262 Coniputeli,:e(1 Nlanutacturing Automation: Employment, Edbcation, and the Workplace

Figure 26.Manutacturing Technician Training at Nissan U.S.A.

Selectionfor pre:

employment

tiiii

hit r

Orientationpre-

. employmenttraining

Employee961ection-

Welcome Use of basic TechnicalBackground and tools skillshistory Manufacturing AttendanceBenefitsadvantages

processes:- Painting

interview

Enrollment - WeldingProductfamiiiaii-zationPersonnelintroduction

BodyfinishingBodyassembly/_disassembly

SafetyManual dexterity

On.the-jobtraining andcertification

Specializedtraining-

Training by supervisor Ski!IF .7ain:ng-framing 1) -;upple :Eget; mePt trainingTraining b. ,!iigineering Pres. ited in traininger_.,rsonnel teriti.:

Pr 'do veisatilitytraining

Japanesetraining-.

Specialized skillstrainingEquipment familiar-izaticnOiiality circlets

Certifiedoperator

2

Ch. 6Education. Traininc.. and Retrainitig Issues 263

Figure 27.Manufacturing Supervisor Training at Nissan U.S.A.

1 Selection forpre-

. employment -,

State acceptablestandardsAssessmentulf..SIIC115Interviews

Pre-cmploymenttrim & chassis'paint plants

Use of basictoolsManufacturingprocesses-painting-welding-body finishing-body assembly/-disassemblySafetyManual dexterity

Interviews

Orientation80-120 hrs.

General orientationTechnical training

engrg.-Proc. engrg.-Oual. control-Qua'. circles-Safety-Cost control.Murne relations __NILiSaf, phlio_sop_hiesJapanese languageJot" ',,,aructiontray

Trainingassignment in

Japan

Correctly performaach operation Inhis/her departmentoepattmentDraft job instruc-tionsheets_foreach operation:Observe supervisorypractices_De_vetoplasic check-list _definin_g:- shift preparationshift start-up

- shift continuation- shift completion.- administrative/generalParticipate in 0.Control Circle sessions

Task certificallen

Certification forcorrect perfor-mance ofviaory skillsSign off by traineesupervii,or andtrainer (operationsmanager)

III

Close supervisionfirst group_

doUble 'manningsubsequent groups

Initial gioup willreceive closesupervision fromoperationsmanagerInstructor trainerswill be ilentifiedtor siiL:,egueritgroups

Job instruction Selected machineVnceie specific

Continue job in-struction trainingFinalize job in-struction sheetsand training aids

F Mot F.I.Ino lacturmo Corpora S A

25-452 0 - 84 - 13 : QL 3

Sur.riv'r training

"E:gineetingtrainersLi car schoolresourcesJapanese trainersTraining teammembers

Leadership/team Supervisory/building/eMployee technical

involvement-- skills- progra-r"

Recognition andfeedbackPrerrnilolteecommunicationskillsProblem solvingImproving andmaintainingperformance

workassignmentsSmall groupleadershipQuality circles

- Interviewing skillsEEOC training

280

Basic electrical-Bc.sic waraulics/pneumaticsWeldingHand tools fluproduction powertools

264 Computeri.'ed A4anulactunno Autornation: EmplOyrti6nt, EduCatiorf;-and the Workplace

Table 55.=-RoboticS Degree Programs and CourseOfferings in North America, 1982

State NumberI. Robotics degrees and/Or

options in nabetieSini partof an engineering degree

2.year schoolsColorado . 1

Florida 2Illinois 1

Michigan 6Ohio . 1

South Carolina 1

4 -year schoolsFloridaMichiganNew YorkNorth CarolinaOregon ....PennsylvaniaSouth CarolinaGraduate.level schoolsaeorgia1.1 linOiS

New YorkNorth Carolina ...PennsylvaniaTexas

21

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

21

II. Robotics courses2.year schbalsAlabama 1

Arizona .

Florida_ 1

GeorgiaIllinois 3

IndianaIowaMar,Mi-cHnanNet'Ohi 3rennes_ae_eWisconsin 2

4-yearArizoArkansas....California ....Colorado ..Delaware .District of Columbia

GeorgiaIllinois .,IndianaMichiganMissi: yn

Nebraska1:qw JerseyNew YorkNorth Carolira .OhioPennsylvania _South CarolinaTt:nnessee .....TexasWest Virgi ..aWisconsin

41

1

2

251

1

21

21

1

1

Slate Number

Delaware....FloridaIllinoisIndianaMichiganMissouriNew JerseyNew YorkNorth CarolinaOhio.South CarolinaTennesseeTexasWisconsinCanada

ill. "Support courses"generally part of arobotics degreeprogram

2year schoolsAlabamaArizonaCalifornia ....ColoradoConnecticutFloridaGeorgiaIllrnoiwIndianaIowaMassachusetts..MichiganMississippiMissouri ....NebraSkaNew Jersey

. .

North CarolinaOhio -0'.' ,a

,yonPennsylvania ....South Carolina:::Tennessee - .

TexasyirginiaWashington ..Wisconsin4_-year schoolsCaliforniaIUinoisIndianaLouisianaMassachusettsMichiganMississippiNew YorkNorth Daki la

1

2

1

21

1

1

1

1

1

21

2

321

1

1

61

41

21

1

2

36723331

61

37

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

31

3I exa_S 1

Canal. 1

Graderile.leYel schoolSCalifornia 1

HawaiiNevada

1

GradiraleAw-e schools Texas 1

California ; Utah 1

..... .

SOURCE Robot ics 1r 1.,trial torty r,,15 or North American RObohcs kducalion and Tr3, vino ;ostour,,,5

As noted earlier in this chapter, the instruc-tional requirements for programmable auto-mation are still emerging. But even based oncurrent skill requirements for automated man-ufacturing facilitiga, widespread use of pro-gramable automation would pose challenges(in the form _of increased demand for the de-velopment of certain skills) to elemeratar, sec-ondary., pogtgecondary, and continuing et:..uca-tion. Indugtry-based and labor union-basedinstructional programs will also be affectedby the increased need for technical instruction.

The present capacities of the U.S. instruc-tional system to prepare students for employ-ment in computer-automated manufacturingfacilities and other types_ of work environ-ments are limited by shortages of equipment;inadequate facilities relative to present andpotential future demand; and inadequate sup-ply of quality instructors for technical andengineering education; In addition, shortagesof science and math instructors on the elemen-tary, secondary, and postsecondary level coin-plicate the process of developing adequatebasic skills in individuals who may wish toprepare themselveS for careers in automatedmanufacturing. Shortages of state-rkthe-artequipment and of teOliiiital instructors are alsoproblems faced in industry- sponsored, in-plantinstructional programs.

Based on OTA research, it is :luestionablewhether the capacity represcnt,2a by the U.S.education, training, and retraiiiii; system will1-L sufficieTii, to meet the challenge of wide-spread use of pregrarrunable aut.. nation,should ex. ens;ve adoption of programmableautomation occur; Instructioral institutionsare willing and interested in meeting the chal-lenge; but it is unlikely that they will be ableto do so unless equipment and instructorshortages are resolVed. additir:._stronger links are developed between industry,1:kbor, educators, and government, it is ques-tin...ible whether programs now in develop-

and those that will be eesigned in thef e vitilLtie in keeping with pi :.sent and an-ticipated PA-relatod skills requireinent.s. In-

tersector cooperation is also needed to ensurethat labor market information is widely dis-seminated among all those affected by pro-grammable automation: i.e., individuals pre-paring to enter the work force; institutions

Ch.6Education; Training. and Retraining Issues 265

that provide education and career counselingservices; einployers who need the informationfor long-range planning., and labor unions, who

.require it to advise their Members of the needto retrain or otherwise enhance skills:

282

olt

Chapter 7

Programmable AutomationIndustrie

u(n sPap.

Summary 269

I nt rodt1C11011 269

Prinip;,I Programmable Automation Industries: Evolution and Otillbbk 271

CAI) 271Numerical Control and Flexible IVUmufacturing Systems 278Robots 287()tiler PA Markets 299

Computer-Integrated Manufacturing: Potential Market DeVelOPinetits . 300

Themes and Conclusions 302

Tables'11,t'

5(; Vstinitited ;Vorldwide CAD Market (Turnkey) by Application 273;-;7. EStiiiiated Turnkey CAD Market Shares 2748. RObiitS: U.S._Producer's Domestic Shipments; by Types; 1979-83 290

(,1.S. Robot Population by Application and Industry; End of 1982 291tit). Some'Agreements Existing Between U.S. and Foreig-n

Robotics Producers .295

G I . Prospects of Different Classes of Robot Vendors 297nstalled Operating Inclustriil Robots by Application; Dec. 31, 1982. .298

Figure,i,age

Machine Tuol_ Import 'Fror . .......... 28029. Breakdov:Ttiof Javanese Ntirnerically (ontrolled Machine 'Pool

Shipment ki ;1 Enci 282:to \'ilt.1(2_ of U.S. .-31-ipments Controllc.d Machine 'Fools

as a Pe_reentag,e of Value of Total U.S. Machine Tool Shipments 233;11. Robot Market Tr,,nds

293Typical Robot Sytetn Cost Breakdown .

Programmable Automation

SummaryThe principal pr able automation

(PA) industries grel in their earlyyears. Development ; industry wasdominated by entrei:- 3. The U.S. Gov-ernment, through prog_ ...ras aimed at improv-ing military procurement, contributed to thelaunch of other major PA industries, includingcornriter-aided design (CAD) and numericalcontrol (NC). Since the mid- to late- 1970's, PAindustries have grown rapidly even during thepast recessions; they are expected to continueto do so throughout this decade. These indus-tries are largely separate at this time, but aunified computer-integrated manufacturing(CITE) industry may emerge ;in the future.

Markets for programmable automation arestrongly international, and various forms ofinterfirm cooperation blur distinctions amongfirms by nationality. Further, PA suppliers are

Chapter 7.

ntiustries

providers of services as well as goods; the roleof hardware and of manufacturing amongthese industrieS is considered much less stra-tegically important than the role of software,controls, and various forms of customersupport.

OTA 's evaluation of PA industries revealsseveral broad themes. These are: 1) there hasbeen a discrepancy between vendor and buyerviews of needs and capabilities; 2) systemsplanning and other services are key featuresof PA supply, while manufacturing itself playsa smaller role; 3) vendors are likely to packageand/or distribute hardware and software ele-meLts made by several firms; 4) both large andsmall firms have played distinctive roles in thedevelopment of FA markets; and 5) govern-ments haVe had a major inflUence on PA m , -

ket development.

IntroductionCAD, robots, NC machine tools, flexible

manufacturing systems (FMS), and other pro-grammable automation equipment and sys-tems are supplied by industries that are cur=rently more or less separate. Of the principalPA industries, the NC industry is the ()iciestand largest, dating from the (950's. WhileCAD and robots were available by the 1960's,sigrificant markets for these technologies did

Mme g.i until the 1970's. These industriesare hr.,: growing quickly.

Thi previously slow and uneven growth seenin markets for automation goods and servicesreflects a persistent mismatch betweerrnercially available technologie8 and tlie , ill=ingness and ability of users to purchase them.This may not be changing. Recent technolog-ical and economic trends=including improve-mentsments in computer control, imRrovements in

equipment interfacing; cost reductions; and agrowing interest in manufacturing productiv-ityhave fueled rapid growth in PA sales dur-ing the last few-years. These trends also haveblurred some of the_disti.nctions am ::ng auto -mation industries. They iuwest that a singlemarke encompassing CIM may eventuallyemerge. Whether er 'LA this happens, industryanalysts forecast ',nat the corhbined PA mar-ket may grow Vora under $t3 billion in salestoday to $20 billion to $30 billion by 199G.*

.*Note that iniblished merket estimates vary enormously, inpart beeause oi different acproac's+ f.1. to market definition. The

6 Arthur D. Litt .e consulting firm, for exam; c :%, contends thatthe 1982 market was over $24 billion. inclvi:ing $11,5 hillier'in -competing tchnelegy." $6.26 'CAM," $6.1 billion in"autonv d Miterials handling.- and $0.26 billion in robots.This estimate appears to use veriLbroad categories that mayapply to nonpiogrammable automation products, AmericanMetal Market/Metalworking News; Sept: 26 I983:

28269

70 Computerized Manut.:cturing Automolion: Employment; Edo,::ation; and the 9Vorkplace

This chapter focuses on the producers andoilers of PA equipment and systems, whoomprise the various PA indiiStries. The dis-ussion provides perspectiVe on their roles as:) so-called "high-techriology" enterprises, and!) sources of employment. Insights into tht::urrent and potential role Of these businesses:n the U.S. economy is prOVided by describ-lig their industrial structure (trends in theiiniber and types Of firiti§), competitive con-Met (e.g., product .ti-ategies), and their finan-:ial performance. This task is made difficult)y the uneven qiiday and availability of in-iustry data some iridtistry data (e.g.; for-obots) are aVaiizible only through_ trade asso-iations and (-;testioned even by tradeassociation staff.' Since automation industriesare growing and Changn :g, descriptions of .eur-rent characteristics offer only a snapshot._ con-sequently, the chapter addresses changes inautomation industries over time.*

Although automation industries are grow-ing relatively rapidtV, Muth of their impact onthe economy will be rePlited indirectly. Thisis because their PririCipal customers are otherbusinesses; which adopt ilit,tiniation to usein producing ebriSurner and other producergood.s;1-rom appliances to construction equip-ment. The direct cOritriutions of these cus-ton-ers to the gross national product (GNP),the balance of trade, and other indicators ofnational economic well-being will thusin part from the use of automated equipmentand systeMS; the size of those Contributionsmay reflect the extent and success of 'Aappl:cationS. This is o:e of the ireasorts whymany analysts believe t; l program-at-Coleautorhatioti will be increasingly in.portanttothe Nation's industrial base and; uititnately,to national se7urity.

'See Iske Kirchner. "Government Miiat F.;4iptia Robotics,Says 10 t President." American Metal MaA.et/Metalworkl:u2,News. Sept. 19. 1983: By contrest. note that data on ectproduction and use in lap.. ,,Apear to be much mo....e thoiouv,L

:nd _accurate. .Because I'A indtistries are evolving relatively quic;:ly, it is

h:rd to dei-::ribe current conditions in endiaing terms. Data pre-sented in thiS report reflect information available up to lateMarch 1984

The lr older th. uNtciner base for program-mable auto ..11 ;,h:2 greater the direct eco-nomic contribution i,i automation businesses.For reference; it shL aid be pointed out that themachine-tool industry, a principal supplier ofcapital goods to metalworking manufacturingindustries; is very small in terms of output andits own employment (under 70,000 employeesin 1983 and under 80,000 employees in 1982;down from about 100,000 in 1980; about two-thirds are production workers). 2 By contrast;the comptAing equipment industry; which isless labo-intensive than the machine tool in-dustry and which serves both industrial andconsumer Markets, is much larger (employingabout 3,420,000 in 1982).3 PA producers comefrom both of these industries and from others.

The ultimate groxirth and size of domesticprogrammable automation industries will beconstrained because aii4oinatiou markets areand always have been international. Althoughthe Urritki States initiated the production anduse of many type§ of PA, these technologiesWere adopted _relatively_ quickly abroad. Japan;the United Kingdom, France, Italy, West Ger-many, SWet-.3:-11, and Norway a2-9 each signifi-cant sourceS of at least oiie type of program-mable automation. This parallel developmentof industries may be due; in part; to Foreigngovernment support '.'or automation develop-ment and use, although it is difficult to eval-uate the effectiveness of such government sup-port actions (see ch. At present, U.S.producers dominate U.S. marketa for program-mable antomai.ior They zilst, export automa-tion products; and some 11 S. firrii: haVe in-vested in the production of P1 andsys.cirns'abroad. For example, iinii:aatititi (nowpart of Westinghouse) rt.)t!Ot ple:V inTelford, England; and CifiC;nri,-kri rtilla&t hasseveral Eu:-opcan T2,1

gcArcrnments restrict access : atiohal mar-kets; international_ competition is automationmarkets will continue to be strong.

2/lationai Machine T.,o1 Builders Ass-iciat!on. 1983-84 Eco-nomic Pandbook of the Machine 71..o! Ind'istry.

'Electronic Indus rice Associatioti. 1983 Market Data Book,

2 8r3

Ch. 7.Programmable Automation Industries 271

Near-term growth of domestic program-mable automation industries will depend onwhether dcmestic economic, conditions arefavorable to investment. The recent recessionseroded the dramatic voWthrates Obs_erved forautomation sales_ toward the end of the lastdecade._Nevertheless, industry analysts com-monly forecast rapid PA market growth forthe decade. For example, PrC.dicasts, Inc., hasforecast that the combined market for "man-ufacturing computers,:' CAD systems, ma-chine -tools and controls, and robots will growoffer 15 percent annually between 1982- :187.4Sales will double, according to thatattaining almost $15 billion by 1987. The anal-ysis assumes a GNP growth rate in rep!, termsof 3.8 percent per year. A more sluggi3O k econ-omy would therefore mean lower P.: rates

Industry growth will also depen. on theability of American managers to -;; itify in-vestments in programmable autornaLi:;.)n andto become adept at using it Inability to doboth has limited the diffusion PA t-f.h-nologies.* In the future, attitudinal obstacles

-Robots; CAD/CAM to Lead 1980's Automation Surge. SaysPredicasts," The Battery Man. November 1983.

While inciinct production osts tend not to vary with choices,; conventiorel equipment. they can vary enotmonsly for PA.Conventional methods of investment analysis have bee. unablet, capture change,t in costs. Also, the conventional emphasison investments with quick paybacks overlooks the long-tbrrnbenefits of flexibility conveyed by PA.

are likely to be lower because widespread con-cern (sometimes bordering on hysteria) aboutinternational competitiveneSs, as well as tradeassociation activities,-techhical and trade pub-lications, and wrious informal networkingactivities are all familiarizing growing num-bers of businessmen with PA's nature andpotential benefits and costs. Conferences spon-sored by the Society of- Manufacturing Engi-neers (SME) and other professbnal and trade as-sociations during the -early 1980's have includednumerous sessions on financial analysis andother activities designed to help engineers per-suade upper management to support automa-tion. Meanwhile, anecdotal evidence suggeststhat in a number of companies upper manage-ment is demanding programmable automa-tion, even before specific applications are iden-tified.

The remainder of this chapter addresses thedevelopment-of the CAD, NC (with FMS), androbotics industries; characterizes related in-dustrial activity; examines the potential fora CIM market; and derives conclusions aboutkey traits of PA industries. Contrasts betweencountries are examined to the extent that datapermit.

rip eipal Programmable Automation Industries:Evolution and Otitlook

CAD

HistoryThe first CAD systcnis ere developed by

users. In the late 1950's ald early 1960's, air-craft and automobile compz.,. -ties, whose prod-ucts are very complex, developed their ownsoftware to aid in product design and-engi-neering. Pioneer users; such as GM and Boe-ing, were necessarily larg arms because earlyCAD and engineering required tie vie cf ex-

pensive mainframe computers-. The diffusionof CAD during the 1960's was slow, limitedby the cost of hardware and the reqUirementsfor extensive engineering and software sup-port. Most early users were defense contrac-tors in the aerospace and electronics indus-tries, where the U.S. Der artment of Defense(DOD) supported CAD development and use.

A formal market for the purchase and saleof CAD emerged during the 1970's, due in partto improvements in computer hardware and

'72 Computeri:ed Manufacturing Automat-Oh: EMplOym-ent, Education, aqd the_Work place '1;

n operating systeniS Whi4li enabled Morefirms to afford__ conipik_erS for increasingly)owerful work. Using'iniei-OproCeSSOrSiInd microcomptiterS made n any taSkS,ng _ basic two=dithenSiOnal computer-aidedirafting% possible without a mainftathe -Ott-niter. The electronics industry, from compo-lent manufactureit to computer makers, pro-Lided a growing_ market for CAD systems....:,7ompared to mechanical inanufactun.7.7 firms;!lectronics firms were more c,)int6:,t-c5_l1e

.techno4;:.-.:' Their ..:.11-F-grated-Arcuit_(and circuit-boa- -ig-n LipplicaticnsNere fundamentally ;,,,o-::.-nensional; andlierefore well-suited to early CAD. Also; the;rowing complexity of integrated circuitstrade computer assistance in design increas-ngly necessary; manual design would require:xorbitant amounts. of time and manpower.Another early commercial application was inmo-dimensional drafting for mechanicaliosign.

During the 1970's, improvements in soft-Nare for two- and especially three-dimensional:AD fueled a market expansion into mechan-.cal_ and mapping as well as architecture;?ngineering, and construction (AEC)_applica-:ions. Some of these advances stemmed fromGovernment-funded efforts,37.-ch emphasized:1;:Je-cispato and electronics applications for::;AD and the integration of CAD and CAM.*

Between .197.3. and 1981,-the CAD systemmarket grew from tinder $25 milt-in-in annualiales to over $1 billion.5 Hardware and soft7,Atare _makers entered the CAD market with3pecific applications and packaged systems:Firms that en teredtne CAD market to fill. anapplications niche typically grew by inct eas-ng the variety of CAD applications they could§60:*. Turnkey vendors. who a sembled and.nstalled systems from componclits-made byvarious sources, also provided training; sup-port, and both standard and custom software.

*(1_overnntentsponsored programs, such as the DOD ICAMInd NASA IPAD programs; are described in ch. 8.

`!'iet, Roger Rowand. "Manufacturing Makes a Move Into the'uture.- Automotive Newt !rletroit: AUtomotiVe News Extra.,t ay 23. 19831. Note that most published saes estimates refer

-ni-nkey qytorns sales and associt d revenues.

28d

=

These vendors, led by CompUtervision; domi-nated the markek. They were sucCessful be7cause their customer=s lacked the technicalsophigtacation to assemble then own systems -(but knew when a turrturkey system would work\for them); and because!their typical relianceon external sources for hardware and other in-puts allowed them to incorporate new tech-nology relatiely quickly. AdpOrdingly, in ad-

. ditio_n to system vendors, the CAD indUstrygrew\_o include groups of hardWare aMUOft-ware productrs serving bah tuil-nkey fiqnsand users directly:.

A_ 7

Duringthe mid -to -late 1970's; thelapaneseand European _markets (especially those-inEngland, Fran53;Sweden; and Norway) grewrapidly, and markets in less deSeioped coun-tries begantto emerge (primarily for mappingapplies tionS)., U.S:-firmsjdominaeed the CADmarket, both within 'the United States and'abroad; largely because of their perceived soft:,ware and svr terns engineering strengthS.JRecent Eiet Cont porary,

The size of the Worldwide CAD marketiscurrently about $1.6 billion in -annual sales.6Five U.S. vendors-at,-.... at for about 80 percentof the market,' alftiough many firms ,haveentered the CAD m, rket recently and othersmay soon enter. In total; there are perhaps 100vendorsc_stoday; Table56 shows recent marketdevelopment as a, function of application.Table 57 shows"rccent market share estimates.

The ctirrent CAD market contains segmentsdiStir!Tuished by type of computerization:

,e, minicomputer, and microcomput-:-.tion. From this perspective; main-

. 'Ad systems are tl,r, most sophisti--"ncomputer-based systems the least.

The market can also he segmented by_ disci!pline of application; although there issubstan7tial overlap rimong disciplines: mechanical(e.g; design of component or future fabrica-tion); electronics (e.g. wirin j, printed circuit -board design; integrated citrui-t design); and

^Thomas Kurlak, "CAD/CAM: Review and Outlook."rill-Lynch Capital Markets, October 1983.

'Ibid.

Ch. 7.Programmable Automation Industries 273

Table E6.Estimated Worldwide CAD Market (Turnkey) by Applicatibil(dollars in millions)

1980Percent

--growth_ Percent

_4981_rowtb_ 1982 _

Percentgrowth

Est.1983

Percentgrowth

Est.1984

Percentgrowth

Mechanical $235 +84 $380 +62 $ 460 +21 $ 552 +20 $ 825 +49Electronic .... .. .... .. 177 +81 235 +33 310 +32 430 +39 645 +50Architecture and engineering 87 +50 138 +59 210 +52 335 +60 485 +45Mapping 13 +128 111 +52 154 +39 190 +23 240 +26Other 20 +11 30 +50 73 +43 93 +27 140 +51

Tbtal .... .._._ 592 +77 894 +51 $1;207 +35 $1,600 +33 $2,335 +46

SOURCE Thomas P kurlah. Merrill Lynch Capital Markets.

AEC (e.g., piping, architectural drafting); Me-chanical applications, especially those using3-D modeling, tend to be more complex thanthe others. The so-called high end of the mar-ket involves larger computers and more so-phisticated software; sold as systems costingseveral hundreds of thousundS of dollars.- Soft=ware alone may amount" to anywhere between25 fif 50 percent of system cost. The low endis compr:sed of workstations and simpler soft-ware packages. These sySteitia are availablefor under $_100;000,_ and some (based on Ap-ples and other small computers) Coat as littleas $10;000 (or less).80ne commercial study_ hasestimated that-sales of CAD systems costingunder $100,000 will grow from the 5 percentshare of total CAD §aleS reached in 1981 (580systems_ valued at $36 million) to 20 percentby 1986 (10,600 systems valued at $544million).9

Two changes in computing hardWare havehad a big impact on the CAD industry. First,in the late 1970's, the introduction of 32=bitminicomputers Jwith virtual-memory operat-ing systems); offerincr improvement over the16-bit standard, changed the corAptitive rank-ing within the industry and broadened themarket. The first firm to offer 32-bit CAD sys-tems, Intergraph, increased its market sharesignificantly. More importantly, the increasein computing power made minicomputers com-petitive with mainframes across a variety ofCAD applications, such as simulation and

'For example, the CAat package for use with Apple Computera, &Signed for architeCts and engineers: is available forabout $1,000. (Bob Schwabach, "Computer paints a pretty pic-ture." St. Paul Dispatch, Nov. 16, 1083.1

'Erie Teichotz and Peggy Kilburn. "Low-Cost CADD atWork," Datamation, Jan. 1983:

solid modeling. This development opened themarket to customers who could not have pur-Chased mainframe-based systems.

Second; the introduction of low-cost; micro-computer-based CAD systems in 1981 =alsobroadened the CAD market. While these CADsystemsgenerally stand-alone workstationunitswe less powerful than systems withlarger computers, they make bask CAD avail=able to a larger group of customers, includingsmall manufacturers and, particularly, AECfirms. Microcomputer-based systems havethus enlarged the portion of the CAD marketserving rionmanufacturing firms, potentiallyincreasing the overlap between CAD and othercdrnputer and computer- graphics applications.One study has predicted that the installedbase of microcomputers and workstations forscientific and engineering applications willgrow from under 9,000 units in 1983 to morethan 275,000 in the next 10 years." Others an-ticipate even higher growth rates;

Although hardware is the largest costment for CAD systems, current competitionin the CAD market centers on software. Thisis because software determines what a systemCan do, while hardware largely determines howfast a task can be done. Moreover, becauseCAD system vendors deliver up to 500 td 600systems a year, it tends to be uneconomicalfor them to produce their own hardware ;* In-

"See"CAE Terminals in_Demnnd,"Computerworld, May 23;1983. Another important hardware development is the grow.ing use of raster display terminals.

*Computervision has been an exception; it has produced itsown CPUalthough it has recently decided to buy and reselllarge IBM computersand it also markets Sun Microsystemworkstations. See: Ed Scarnell, "IBM CAD/CAM ThrustLinked to Remarketers," Computerworld, Aug. 22, 1983.

289

274 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

Table 57.Estimated-Turnkey CAD Market Shares

1980-Percent- 1981- Percent 1982 Percent1983(est.) Percent

Computervision $191 32 $271 30 $ 325 27 $ 395 25IBM 71 12 145 16 225 19 340 21Intergraph 56---9 --91 10_ -156 13 246 15Calma-G.E 62 10 100 11 140 12 195 12Applicon -SLB ..... ,... . 68 11 84 9 96 8 100 6McDonnell Douglas Auto 14 2 35 4 46 4 60 4Auto-trol Technology 51 9 48 5 44 4 49 3Othera 79 13 120 13 175 14 215 13

Totals $592 100% $894 100% $1,207 100% $1,600 100%Growth +51% 35% 33%aContrel Data, Prime, Digital Equipment, Data General, Sanders, Gerber Scientific, etc.Note: Control rAt.,ravienues estimated at $81 millIonior1982, $76 million tor 1983, $106 million forl984. Service estimated

at 60% ior 1983, 40% for 1984. Turnkey sales ($30 million for 1983) from workstations and BOO series.

SOURCE: Thomas Kurlak, Merrill Lynch Capital Markets.

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

Estimated Turnkey CAD Market Shares

111ComputerVisionillIntergraph t' Applicon-SLB I IAutaTrol Tech.

ED IBM 1111Calma-C. E.111.111.111McDonnellDouglas Auto D OthOr

1980 1981 1982 1983E

NOTE: Control data revenues estimated at $61 mil for 19d2, $76 mit for 1983. $106 million for 1984. Service estimated at 60%for 1983. 40% for 1984. Turnkey sales 1$30 mu for 1983) from workstations and BOO series.

SOURCE: Thomas Kurlak, Merrill Lynch Capital Markets.

2 9 0

stead, they rely on a few mass-producing hard-ware vendors for their equipment.* CADyen-dors' contributions to the product come fromsoftware development, systems integration,applications engineering, and other supportactivitiesthey produce services that accom-pany the goods they sell. The costs of repli-cating software; compared to hardware, arenegligible. The principal fixed costs born byturnkey vendors are for R&D and for softwaredevelopment, which may range from tens tohundreds of thousands of dollars. R&D tendsto run at 10 to 12 percent of sales for majorCAD vendors; this compares with an averageof about 8 to 10 percent for major firms in thedata-processing industry."

A variety of firms have entered the CADmarket or expanded their involvement throughmerger and acquisition, product licensing, andproduct innovation. Many computer vendors(e.g., DEC, Sperry Univac, Honeywell, Harris,Prime, Data General, Perkin-Elmer, and Hew-lett-Packard) have entered the CAD market,often by selling systems with software li-censed from other firms. IBM, for example,offers its hardware with Lockheed's CADAMsoftware; it has recently moved to provide itshardware through other software developersacting as so-called value-added remarketers.Large diversified companies (e.g., GE andSchlumberger) have also entered the CADmarket, principally through the acquisition ofsmaller CAD or software firms. GE, for exam-ple, bought Calma; Schlumberger bought Ap-plicon.

In addition; independent software suppliershave proliferated t . meet special applicationsneeds and to meet the growth ih demand as-sociated with the spread of ihicro-based sys-tems.** One group of specific applicationsserved by software firms is computer-aided en-

*The Digital Equipment Corp. VAX line has been particu-lady popular for CAD systems.

"Personal communication Terence Carleton, analyst, Kidder,Peabody & Co.

**The market research firm IDC estimates that tinnus.Wesof microcomputer software overall will grow from $965 millionin 1982 to nearly $7.5 billion in 1987. Independent firms nowsupply about 50 percent of that software, and their share maygrow to 57 percent by 1987. Computerwor1d, March 14,1983:

Ch. 7.Progrativriabte automation industries 275

gineermg; In this area, MacNeal-SchwendlerCorp. and Swanson Analysis offer widely usedfinite-element analysis packages (MSC/1\1as-tran and ANSYS, respectively); Such specif-ic applications software is typically suppliedas part of_system packages; or sold directlyto users. Software for microcomputers; how-ever, tends to be =sold in higher volumes andat lower costs, using networks of distributorsand dealers. Otherparticip_ants-in-the-berCAD_market-incltide'prOdueers of such related'items as documentation and mierofilth gener-ators. These items have come into_ deinand asCAD users developed or perceived neWheedsassociated with CAD. At leaSt fOin- techniCalpublishing companies, for example, started upduring the first half of 1983 alone.

Ag-rowing but hard-to-measure factor in theCAD market is the participation of CAD userswho have developed their own systemsal-though their role remains-small. External saleof internally develoPed CAD systems allowsusers to gain an additiOnal return on their in-vestments in SoftWare development. Histori-cally, users who del/61606d their own systemsdid not enter the CAD market for several rea-sons: Their applications tend `o -lie highly cus-tomized; it is difficult and coStly to preparefor external marketing; and users may preferto retain their systems to enhance their ownprofitability. Lockheed, for example, foundmeeting divergent market needs to be a ma=jor challenge durfit its first 1.,,5 years sellingCADAM; IBM is known to have developed itsown CAD software, but markets CADAMsoftware instead (it also markets lesssophisticated software of its own design).

Ford recently decided to market, throughPrime Computer, a 3=D Wire frame design anddrafting system it developed and has used forthe past 10 years; it generalized_the system fromautomotive applications to design Of Struc-tures; mechanical components, and systerriS.12And Chrysler plans to develop with ControlData advanced mechanical CAD and CAMsoftware; which Chrysler would use for vehi;cle desigh and development and Control Data

"Computerworld, June 6, 1983.

29i

276 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment; Education; and the Workplace

would market as part of a line of computergoods and aervicea.13 Other user-producers in-clude McDonnell Douglas (Unigraphics), theFrench firm Dassault (CATIA); and Northrop(NCAD).

U.S; firms continue to dominate both U.S.and_foreign markets for CAD systems. Ninetypercent of the U.S. CAD market is served byU.S. firms.'4 Major CAD vendors operate over-seas faeilities to serve foreign markets. Inter-graph, for example, has a customer supportcenter in the Netherlands that serves custom-ers in Europe and the Middle East. The cen-ter carries out repair, training; and other cus-tomer support activities. U.S. CAD systemsare generally sold in Japan through Japanesediatributbra.'

The international market appears to be ex-periencing a subStantial degree Of internation-al merger, acquisition, and especially licens-ing activity, European firms have developedimportant CAD software, but Europe lackssignificant suppliers of CAD hardware. Con-sequently, EuroPean software has been li-Censed_to U.S. firms (e.g., Evans and Suther-land, Prime, Computervision) that packageCAD systems; and U.S. firms have purchased

-foreign companies. For example, Evans_andSutherland bought Shape Data (United King=dorn), and Computervision bought CambridgeInteractive Systems (United Kingdom) andGrado (West Germany). Such "cross=fertilita,tion" is a typical means Of entry into foreignmarkets.

The Japanese role in the CAD market re-limited and focused on hardware. Jap-

anese xiendera tend to be computer firms,rather than turnkey companies; they sell sys-tems providing American software under li-cense, although they are developing their ownsoftware internally and through a govern=merit-sponsored consortium;

3

1

""Control Data and Chrysier to Make SeftWare AutomotiveNeiksj_ Dee. 12; 1983.

" OTA Automation Industries Workshop.'_'-Jack_ Thornton and Tsukasa Furukawa,. "GE, Japanese Plan

Automation Venture," Americati Metal WrketiMetalworkingNews; Nov. 1; 1982.

Likely ChiangeThe CAD market will remain relatively dy-

namic for the next several years. Industryanalysts predict that it will grow at ratesbetween 30 and 50_percent per year someforecasts for the CAE sub-market antici-pate even higher rates of growth. While indus-try spokesmen believe that most of the For-tune 500 companies already use CAD, growthwill come froth both existing and new custom-ers; Factors such as expected improvementsin systein capabilities, especially for 3-Dmodeling; greater/ease of use and reductionsin costs- for given capabilities will widen therange of customers by size, industry; and ap-plication area These trends will create newniches and ancillary-product markets; andthey will thange patterns of competition. Mostanalyate expect that mechanical applicationsand CAE systems will become more prom=inent in the CAD market; reflecting bothtechnological development and the expectedSpending growth of manufacturers as they re-cover from the recent recessions. _One sourceexpects that mechanical design will compriseabout half of CAD applicatiaiia, and that CAEwill account for about 20 percent of the work-station market; by 1987.'6 Mapping and faeil-itiesmanagement applications are also ex-pected to grow, serving government, utility,-and natural resource develOpment customers.

CAE has been a major factor in the growthOf the custom microchip market." Expectedgrowth in the rnierocl market overall andthe custom share will spur CAE sales. In themechanical area future use in forging,die de-sign, for example; will_be encouraged by an AirForce project to develop a generie forging-dieCAD/CAE system for aerospace applicationa:The project involves a consortium of firms."

While the market is expected to grow rap=idly, the number of vendors may stabilize or

''"1987 CAD Market Estimated at $6.9 Billion," AmericanMetal Market/Metalworking News,,Dec. 5, 1983.

"Bohdan 0. Szuprowicz, "Microelectronics Here ShowingMassive Grow,h1" Computerworld,_Pec. 5, 1983.

'"Bruce vei nyi, "Shultz Steel Selected by Air- to De-velop Forking Die CAD System, American Metal Market/Metalworking News, Jan. 30, 1984. ,

292

fall. Consolidation is occurring already; asboth turnkey firms and computer companiesacquire software houses and expand their Of-ferings. Computervision. for example, recent-ly arranged to buy the Organization for In-dustrial Research, a privately held CADsoftware firm with strength in group tea:nology. IBM's growing involvement in theCAD market, particularly at the high end butpotentially in low-cost systems, is also likelyto promote consolidation.

One trend that may affect sales, is thegrowth in firms offering CAD services and/orrelated facilities to manufacturers; usuallysmall companies whidi cannot afford CAD ontheir own or companies of any size that can-not meet extraordinary needs. These busi-nesses resemble computer time-sharing serv-ice bureaus that provide _generaLPurpOsecomputing services. Danly Machine Corp., fOrexample, will sell CAD services thrOugh itsCAD/Share Service Center to automotive Sup-pliers. In particular, it will provide atitherizedtool and part vendors with computerized de-sign data to enable them to use CAD in bid=ding for contracts and performing design_ andproduction work for the Buick division of GM.It will also provide CAD training and con-sulting services."

Some CAD service bureaus provide comple-mentary manufacturing "services," For exam-ple, Camel( Systems, Inc., sells time on com-puters to customers designing prototype tools,which it will also manufacture for therm" NCRand Control Data Corp. have developed anelectronic CAD design center that allows in=tegrated circuit makers and systems housesto design at engineering workstations, haveaccess to a supercomputer, use semicustomcircuit "cells," check circuit performance, andarrange for chip fabrication.2'

AS the inStalled base of CAD systemsgrows, the role of vendor services (e.g., soft-

'9" Danly Sets Up CAD/CAM Office for Auto liiduStrY,"American Metal Market/Metalworking News, Nov. 7. 1983.

"" Firm Sells CAD/CAM Computer Time to Clients." Amer-ican Metal Market /Metalworking News. Sept: 26; 1983;

"See CAE, November December 1983:

Ch, 7:Programmable Automation industries 277

ware updates; related training) will grow: Thisgrowth will reflect in part the growth in salesto smaller firms; which traditionally buy a va-riety of services they cannot afford to performthemselves. Already (although in part becausethe recession damped new system sales) Corn-putervision has seen its share of revenues fromservices to existing customers rise signifi-cantly in the last few_years.22 Also CAD ven-dors contacted by OTA appear to be increas-ing their effos in the area of training;corresponding in part to growth or change insoftware offerings. The growing role of serv-ices parallels the experience in the computerindustry, where service activities and theirproportional contribution to revenues in-creased with the spread of computer systems.

The extent to which CAD vendors will ad-dress the broader problems of computer-basedintegration of manufacturing is a key uncer-tainty for the future of the industry. Comparedto other types' of firms especially industrialmachinery vendors, CAD Vendors_may be es-pecially well-positioned to link CAD to CAM.The design-to-production chain begins withCAD, and CAD firms are already developingsystems for modeling production activitiesand communicating pr6duction instructions toother equipment. Computervision, for exam-pleioffers-sy s terns-that-program-NC-machine--tools, robots, and coordinate-measuring ma-chines design and model manufacturing cells;design tooling, molds, and dies; and performcomputer-aided process planning. It offersmultifunction systems, such as a system forplant design, engineering, construction, andmanagement. Prime Computer will market aBritish computer-aided process planning sys-tem which can be integrated with CAD; whileMCAutO purchased Insight Technology; whichdeveloped _a CAD system terminal that can belinked to NC machine tools.

As the above examples suggest, many ven-dors are broadening their lines through acqui-sitions. Also, some vendors are developing

- --"Jack Thornton, "Turn-key CAD/CAM Producers Confront

a Difficult Year,"American Metal MarketilVletalWorking News,Jan. 3, 1983.

29'3

278 Computerized Mani, lecturing Automation: Employment, Education; and the Workplace

their own software to facilitate CAD and CAMlinks. Mc Auto, for example, is developing ex-pert systems_ for evaluating robot system con-figurations."

Some vendors_(e.g., Apollo) are moving awayfrom dedicated CAD terminals in favor of gen-eral-purpose engineering/professional worksta-tions. These workstation§ WOu ld accommodatenot only drafting and design, but also re-search, software development, and "officeautomation" functidh8; they would thus facil-itate shifts in customer activities and softwaxepreferences and lower the risk of hardware ob-solescence. Multifunction workstations couldfacilitate manufacturing integration; especial-ly when combined with sophisticated datacommunication systems linking engineering,production, and general corporate databaseS.An alternative approach is to market low-cbst,dedicated CAD workstations which can belinked to mainframe computers for Other func-tions that use a common database. Some analysts expect sales of such low-cost microcomputer workstations to grow at the expense ofMinicomputer-based systeths, a develOpMehtthat could pose problems for turnkey Vendort.24

For other CAD vendors, the term "CAD/CAM vendor' will continue to be misleading;

_since_their_products serve only design or draft-Mg purposes. Because a market for basic CADwill remain to serve small manufacturers andnorimanufacturing customers; the divisiOn Ofthe market between small; "Mae" firths andlow-cost CAD firms on the one_ hand, andlarge, integrated system-orieuted firth§ on theother is likely to deepen. Alsb, _firm§ not Seek;ing to integrate CAD and CAM may be sub-sumed by the larger business graphics market,depending on the complexity of their systems.

International competition and trade trendsfin. CAD will depend on how CAD productsand markets develop abroad and whether Pro=tectionistmeasures are invoked.* A major

"Lauri Griesen, "McAuto Working to Add Dynamic Param-eters, Expert Systems to Robot Programming Software,"American Metal Market/Metalworng News, Dec._ 26, 1983.

"Thomas Kurlak, "CAD/CAM: F011oWup to _Opinion onChanges," Merrill Lynch Capital Marketa. Dec. 7, 1983.

*For example: a Norwegian firm, Kongsberg, is doing verywell in the European CAD mtu-ket.

certainty is the future role of the Japanese inthe CAD market. The delayed entry of Japaninto this market makes it hardto forecast Jap-anese competition in CAD, although there arenow major efforts under way in Japan to de-velop CAD software and Japanese companiesare actively involved in producing graphic§peripherals (e.g., displays; printers, and,plot-ters). However, the Japaneses could concen-trate on gaining benefits from the use of so-phisticated CAD systems in designing.inte\grated circuits and other products; rather thanfrom the the sale of CAD systems.

Numerical Control and FlexibleManufaCtiiiing Systems

HistoryNumerical control (NC) is the oldm:, of the

programmable automation technologies andMarkets. DOD underwrote the developmentOf the technology in the 1940's and 1950's, andrequired its use by principal aerospace contrac-tors, thereby assuring the launch of NC pro-duction. It also fostered the adoption of APTas the standard NC programing language,and it continues to purchase mathihe toolsthrough prime contractors as part Of the pro=curement process;

The NC market is a subset of the broadermachine-tool market, which contains two prin-tipal divisions: metal-cuttinE machine tools(e.g., lathes, and boring; miring, and grind-ing machines SIC 3541) and metal-formingmachine tools (e.g., presses; and boring, punch=ing, shearing; and bending machinesSIC3542).* However; the market for NC machinetools can be treated separately from the over-all machine-tool market. inasmuch as custom-ers do not cOnsider NC and conventional ma-chine tools to be _alternatives. ** This hasbeen increasingly the case: As NC technologyhas_ improved, as the cost of controls hasfallen, computerization has improved, and

*Other components of the machine tool industry includemakers of special dies, tools, jigs and fixtures (SIC 3544,machine-tool accessories (SIC 3545, and other, not-elsewhere-classified metalworking machinery- (SIC 3549).

**Note that available data do not always make clear whatpertains to NC production and what to machine tools overall.

as applications have grown more complex andcostly, many machine tool buyers have cometo prefer NC equipment to conventional equip-ment. Also, customers have grown to under-stand how and why NC and conventional costsdiffer; becoming more willing to bear thehigher initial cost of adopting NC.*

The "machine-tool industry" has historical-ly referred to builders of machine-tool bodies.**The high cost of developing controllers (esti-mated to be between $1 million and $5 million)and the tendency for controller cost to fall withhigh-volume production generally deterredmachine-tool builders from building their owncontrollers. Instead, they bought controllersfrom firms serving both machine-tool buildersand other groups of customers. In 1981, 22companies made positioning -type (direct dataentry) NC controls; 16 companies made contin-uous path-type (computerized data entry) con-trols, and 23 made dial or plugboard-type con-trols., Shipments in 1982 exceeded $192million; 1981 shipments exceeded $273 mil-lion."

The machine-tool industry has had a largenumber of firms, given the small sales volumeof the industry. Many of these firms are small.The 1963 Census of Manufactures counted1,146 companies with 1;167 establishments,only 415 of which had 20 or more employees.The 1977 Census of Manufactures counted1;343 establishments; 469 with at least 20employees.' More recent data indicate thatthere are 1,285 companies with 1;345 estab-lishments, two-thirds of which have fewer than20 employees.--- T-he -20- largest companies ac-count for 55 percent of industry shipments;the 50 largest account for 75 percent."

*In some cases_ customers retrofit or rebuild older machinesto add NC capability; this is usually cheaper than buying newNC equipment. However, machine performance tends to be low-er than that provided by new NC equipment.

**However, machine tools are often sold by nonmanufactturerdistributors.

"U.S. Department of Commerce, Report No. MA-36A."National Machine Tool Builders Association, 1983-84 Hand-

book of the Machine Tool Industry."Eli Lustgmten, Vice President, Paine, Webber, Mitchell,

Hutchins, personal,commumcation.

25-452 0 - 84 - 19 : QL 3

Ch. 7.Programmable Automation Industries 279

Because NC hardware was relatively expen-sive, and because its use required acceis tocomputers and special support personnel;training, and maintenance, early productionand use of NC was concentrated among rela-tively large firms. Although some smaller aer-ospace subcontractors did adopt NC in the1960's, small firms were very slow to adoptNC. The diffusion of NC accelerated in the late1960's; Between 1964 and 1968, unit ship-ments of (U.S.) NC machine tools virtuallydoubled; although unit shipments fell brieflyin the early 1970's, they about doubled againin the period 1968-78, and rose over 150 per-cent between 1978 and 1981." During this pe-riod, the variety of NC equipment also grew.Sales of NC machining centers (multifunctionmachine tools made possible by NC technolo-gy and the advent of automatic tool changers)grew by over 300 percent between 1970 and1980.29 Nevertheless; by 1978 only 2 percentof machine tools in use were numerically con-trolled; by 1983, that proportion was 4;7 per-cent.30 31

Meanwhile, growth in demand for industrialequipment fell overall in the 1970's comparedto the 1960's; and the relative importance ofmachine tools in particular also-declined. Keymetalworking markets grew slowly or shrankin the 1970's due to changes in customer salespatterns; closing of less efficient factories;and increased offshore production; Althoughbooming investment by commercial aerospaceand automobile industries caused sales tosurge in the late-1970's; the principal machinetool buyers were the dominant firms in differ,ent metalworking industries, who could affordmajor modernization efforts.32 The decline in

"Nationa/ Machine Tool Builders Association, 1983-8411mA-book of the Machine Tool Industry, and U.S. Department ofCommerce;_ latest data are incomplete, to avoid disclosure.

"National Machine Tool Builders Association, 1983-84 Hand-book of the Machine Tool Industry.

""The 13th American Machinist Inventory of MetalworkingEquipment 1983," American Machinist. November 1983.

"National Machine Tool Builders Association, 1983-84 Hand-book of the Machine Tool Indust'''.

"Garry J. Schinasi, "Business Fixed Investment: Recent De-velopments and Outlook;" Federal Reserve Bulletin, vol. 69,January 1983; John Duke and Horst Brand, "Cyclical Behaviorof Productivity In the Machine Tool Industry," Monthly La-bor Review, November 1981.

295

280 Computerized MaritifactUririg AUtOrnatidn: Employment; Education; and the Workplace

the machine=tbel proportion of total expendi-tUres fot equipment appears to be due in partto the increase in productivity of individualmachine tools (reflecting improvements in cut-ting tools and other changes as well as the im-plementation of NC and CNC); prodUctivityimprovements allow customers to billy fewer(albeit sometimes more expensive) machinesto do a given amount of work. The decline inthe machine-tool proportion also reflects changesin product design and composition that lowerthe amount of machining performed. The long-term market decline exacerbates the impactof import competition; it also makes sales tosmaller firms and other new categories of cus:tourers more important.

The development of CNC, which essentiallybuilt -computer capability into the machinetool; made NC technology more accessible tosmaller firms. However, while the CNC marketgrew during the 1970's, major U.S; producers

Figure 28.MachineU.S. Machine Tool ImportsMS a percentage of U.S. machine tool consumption)

1962 '64 '66 '68 '70 '72 '74

Year

SOURCE NatOnal Machine Tom Builders' AssoCiallori

tended to neglect the small-firm market. Thishappened because the large=firm Market wasstrong_ during the mid td- late 1970's. Also,small firms were considered relatively unre-liable customers; particularly sensitive tomathine:tool market cycles and lacking intechnological sophistication.

During the 1970's; the Japanese increasedtheir share of the U;S; NC machine-tool mar-ket. They quickly dominated the U.S. marketfor small NC lathes and machining centers (seefig. 28); The import success of the Japa;nese has been attributed to several factora,including the inadequacy of domestic capac=ity (which has led delivery times to rise to betTheen 1.5 and 2 years), the Japanese strategyof concentrating on Selling a few productsto assure Competitive advantage,* and favor-.

*By focusing on a few products, Japanese producers gainedscale economies, allowing more flexibility in pricing.

Tool !nil:kid TrendsJapanese share of the U.S.machine tool market

EE

vi

ow-en

a

a

'76 '78 '80 1972 '73 '74 '75 76 '77 '78 r '79 '80 '81 '82

Year

296,

Ch. 7.Programmable Automation Industries 281

able exchange rates, which gave the Japanesea price advantage relative to U.S. firms. Otherfactors, discussed below, include the slownessof U.S. machine-tool firms to adopt new tech-nology and differences in U.S. and Japanesemarket characteristics (and related govern-

, ment policies);

The U.S. machine-tool industry has histori-cally been slow to adopt new technology.Because of relatively low levels of capital in-vestment, the average age of equipment usedin the machine tool-producing industry hasbeen relatively high and the level of equipmentsophistication relatively low. Old equipmentappears to be a factor in the poor productivityperformance of the industry in the past (pro-ductivity growth in machine tools peaked in1966; subsequently declined; and rose againin the late 1970's).33 The machine-tool indus-try has tended to rely more on skilled laborthan on advanced equipment in production;This pattern developed because of the com-plexity and low production volumes of ma-chine tools; the prominence of small; small-batch producers withliinited ability to_ investin new equipment; and the high levels Of finamcial risk in the industry,* The machine -toolbusiness is considered financially _riskybecause of its sensitivity to changes in thebusiness cycle and in the. buying patterns ofmajor customer groups including DOD, otherequipment producers, and makers of consumerdurables. Prior to the recent pair of recessions,business declined severely for the industry in1956-58, 1969-71, and 1974-75.

Characteristics of the U.S. NC industry mayhave undermined its competitiveness. Threedimensions for comparison are interfiim com-munication, relative specialiiation, and atten-

0"John Duke and Horst Brand. "Cyclical Behavior of Produc-

tivity in the Machine Tool Indusery, Montirly Labor Review,November 1981_

*On the other hand. some critics of the industryin particu-lar. the industry leaderscharge that management becameoverly interested in new technology. David Noble, for exam-ple, argues that the machine-tool industry has suffered from"unreasonable technical enthusiasm and a shift away from theshop floor as a repository of innovative and practical ideastoward the laboratories . ..." David Noble, "An Outsider'sView of Machine Tool Industry;" American Metal Market/Metalworking News, Aug. 8, 1983.

tion to small firms. According to some ana-lysts, compared to Japanese firms, U.S.producers of machine tools, controllers, andsemiconductors have not communicated wellwith each other. To improve the match be-tween machine tools and controls, major ma=cline -tool builders attempted to produce theirown controllers during the 1970's; most failedto do so successfully. In contrast, Japaneseproducers of semiconductors, controllers, andmachine tools appear to have communicatedwell; and they have participated in cooperativeR&D and product development efforts. Coop-erative efforts and communication appear tohave been encouraged by the Japanese Gov-ernment (see ch. 9).* These collaborations mayhave contributed to their rapid domination ofthe small machine tool market.

The different patterns of interaction amongfirms in the two countries are due, in part, todifferent industrial structures. In Japan, themajor producers of machine tools and controlsare highly specialized, although they are linkedas "independent" subsidiaries to producers ofrelated products. For example; the leadingJapanese control builder; a monopolist, is alsolinked to related businesses: Fuji; a leadingelectronics firm; spawned Fujitsu, a leader inindustrial controls, which in turn spun offFanuc; a specialist in NC controllers. MostJapanese machine-tool companies have stand-ardized their products to use_Faxmc controls.By contrast, in the United States, GE oncedominated the NC control market but lost itsshares to competitors such as Allen-Bradleybecause it failed to keep pace with market andtechnological developments. (This may havehappened because GE does not focus exclu-

, sively on the machine-tool market, or becauseof bad managerial judgment, or both.) Whilethe Japanese pattern of specialization mayhave facilitated early production and use ofNC, its value in more complex areassuch as

*They have also been dted in recent industry appeals for U.S.Government intervention, including the 1982 petition byHoudaille to deny investment tax credits to purchasers of Jap-anese NC machining centers and punching machines, and the1983 petition by the National Machine Tool Builders' Associ-ation for restriction of machine tool imports on national secur-ity grounds.

29 7

?82 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

machining cells or FMSthat draw on elec-tronics and mechanics is lesS

Finally, Japanese import penetration builtsuccessfully_ on the unmet demands of smallerfirths for NC equipment. Japanese productionand use of smaller NC equipment was relative-ly well-established before exports were signif-icant. About two thirds of NC equipment inJapan is bought by small-and mediiia-Siiedfirms (see fig. 29); Smaller firms haVe histor-ically been a focus of Japanese Governmentsupport and interest (a legacy of the relativelyrecent transition of the Japanese- economyaway from an agricultural base) Unlike theU.S. Government; the Japanese Governmentfocused its support for NC diffilsion on com-mercial/civilian use; especially by small andmedium-sized firths. AlSo, ties between finalcustomers and producers appear to be strong-er in Japan, another factor that may havehastened NC diffiisidn in Japan. The expertisegained by_Japanese inathirietool builders insmaller NC installations helped them to servethe small -user niche in the U.S. market, whilethe increase in production volume afforded bysales to markets in two countries loweredcosts.

Figure 29.-Breakdown of Japanese NumericallyControlled Machine Tool Shipments by

Size Of End Users (percent)Large corporatiOns

1970

1971

1972

1973

1974

1975

1976

1977...

1978

1979

1980

47

64

61

64

Small- and medium-sizedcorporations

SOURCE Jelaan Machine idol Builders' Association, Reproduced in "MachineTool Industry' The Long Road to Recovery" by Eli LuStgarten, Panle,Webber, Mitchell, HutchinS, Aug, 8, 1983

Recent and ContemporaryThe NC industry in the United States has

become more competitive as declining costshave allowed more companies___ to produceequipment for small customers. The fact thatNC machine-tool builders- continue to be larg-er, on average, than non-NC firms is a legacyof the past, when only large firms could bearthe expense and risk of NC production. Finan-cially, the machine-tool industry as a wholehas been suffering. New orders peaked hi 1979at $5.62 billion, declining 75 percent to $1.5billion in 1982 and continuing at 1982 levelsthrough the first half of 1983. The decline oforders has been sharper than the previous de-cline in 1973-75, and the reduction in capacityutilization has been aggravated by the factthat capacity had expanded in response to thelate-1970's surge in demand."

U.S. NC producers have been selling higherproportions of NC equipment relative to totalmachine-tool volume. By 1982, NC accountedfor nearly 35 percent of total machine-toolshipments (see fig. 30). Producers also arebroadening their product offerings to includenot only NC-equipment aimed at smaller users,but also machines for processing other maters=als such as plastics, as well as fleicible manu-facturing systems (FMS) which link individualmachine tools and materials handling equip-ment and are computer-controlled.

FMS, as_a cornerstone of so-called horizon-tal integration of prOduction, provides a vehi-cle for machine-tool builders to expand theiractivity in selling integrated programmableautomation. These systems also help machine=tool builders serve new groups of batch-pro=duction customers whose output (10 to 50parts per hour) is leSs than that required tojustify transfer lines but more than that whichsingle pieces of equipment can handle. Aero-space firms appear to be particularly inter-ested in FMS.

- -

Lustgarten "Machine Tool Industry: The Long Roadto ReCoirery," status report, Paine Webber Mitchell Hutchins;Aug. 8, 1983.

29d

_Figure 30: Value of U.S. ShipMents of NumericallyControlled Machine Tools as a Percentage of Value of

Total U.S. Machine Tool ShipmentS (for machinesvalued over $1.000 1972.77 and over $2,500 1978.82)35

30

25

20

is

101972 73 74 75 76

Year

77 78 79 80 81 82

NOTE 1982 data are for tir,?:t three quarters

SOURCE US Department of Commerce. ''Current Industrial Reports.Sene.s MO-35W, Metalworking Machinery (quarterly andannual summaries)

Although the market for FMSs is relativelysmall and existing FMSs have been largely ex-perimental, machine-tool firms appear eagerto supply FMSs and even to underprice bids.35The leading FMS_vendor is Kearney & Trecker(part of Crosslz Ti.ecker), which has sold abouthalf of the FMSs installed in the UnitedStates. Other vendors irclucle Cincinnati Mila-cron, White-Sundatrand,Ingersoll Milling Co.;Mazak Machinery Co. (lEarniiiaki); and Gid-dings & Lewis Machine Tool Co.

The association with advanced technologyafforded by FMS offerings can be helpful toproducers for marketing purposes: For simi-lar reasons, some machine-tool builders (e.g.,Cincinnati Milacron and Textron/Bridgeport)are beginning to sell robots; Also; U.S. firmsmay emphasize "high-technology" capitalgoods as a competitive strategy; telling cus-tomers that higher prices relative to the Jap-anese reflect a technology premium. Finally.support for FMS develciprnerit (and PUrehase

_

As of late 1983, Kearney and Trecker reported about $250million worth of proposals with high likelitniod of becomingorders. 'Machinery/Capital Go-o-di Industry: Frexible Manufac-turing Systems," Kidder, Peabody, & Co., Inc., Sept. 30. 1983.

Ch. 7.--Programmable Automation industries 283

by aerospace firms) is provided by DOD proj-eets promoting the design and use of inte-grated manufacturing systems. While FMS of-fers users the potential for savings inproduction time, direct labor, floorspace, andwork-in-process inventory, the number of cus-tomers is low because existing systems are ex-pensive; require extensive planning and sup-port; and prove relatively difficult to operatesuccessfully (at least at first).

Trade trends, especially imports, remain asalient feature of the contemporary_NC andoverall machine-tool industries. The U.S. bal-ance of trade in machine tools becathe negativein 1977 and has steadily worsened. Japan is theprincipal source of U.S. machine tool imports.Other major import sources are West Germany,the United Kingdom, Taiwan, Switzerland,and Italy: The decline in domestic productionin 1983 contributed to growth in the percent-age of imports relative to 1982 levels, from 28to about 37 percent for metalcutting machinetools and from 22 to almost 36 percent formetal forming machine tools." The Japaneseshare of the U.S. market for some machine-toolproducts exceeds 50 percent. It is greatest forNC lathes and machining centers, which arethe fastest growing markets in the UnitedStates and abroad." Because of the recession,Japanese machine-tool exports declined sig-nifictintly from their 1981 peal in 1982 and1983.38 Various government and trade groupsare currently examining whether the Japanesehave,engag6d in unfair competition and debat-ing whether the machine-tool industry in theUnited_ States has a special claim to the publicinterest for national security reasons.*

Department of Commerce 1984U S. Industrial Outlook(Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office) January1984:

'wee Eli Lustgarten. "Machine Tool Industry: The Long Roadto Recovery," status report, Paine Webber Mitchell Hutchins,Aug. 8, 1983.

"Imports from Japan Fall; " American MetalMarketiltfetWworking News. Japanese Machine Tools Supple-ment, July 11, 1983.

*The National Academ_y of Sciences, the International TradeCommission, the Department of Commerce, and Congress haveactivc:y considered machine-tool industry issues during the past2 years:

29 9

284 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: EmplOyMent, Education; and the Workplace

U.S. exports have also been declining, dueto worldwide recession and to longer term,noneconomic reasons,_ During the late 1970's,changes in foreign policy curbed shipments toEastern Europe and the U.S.S.R., while dur-in the early 1980's, the nationalization and/or government-imposed consolidation of ma-chine-tool industries in such countries asFrance, Spain, and the United Kingdom haveeffectively closed these exports markets to theUnited States.*

Some compames based abroad have begunto produce machine tools in the-United States.MazEtk (a subsidiary of the _Japanese firm,Yarnazaki) has estab' *shed a highly automatedfacility in Kentucky for producing NC lathesand machining centers. Other firms, such asLeBlond-Makino, Hitachi. Seiki, and Schar-mann Gmbh., are only assembling foreign-designed equipment in the United States. Andsome foreign firms, such as Mitsubishi HeavyIndustries and Toyoda Machine Works, havelicensed machine designs for production byU.S. firms.

Likely ChangeDuring the next two decades there may be

a resurgence in machine -tool demand as partof-a-broader trend-teWard industrial modern-

ization; Several analysts anticipate such atrend, since about_ a third of machine-teels inuse iii the United States are at least 20 yearsold." Indeed, recent research shows that older,rhidWeStern plants are among the principalbuyers of new machining technology.° TheDepartment of Commerce has forecast rela-tively rapid business growth for the machine-tool industry during 1984; but it expectsshipments to remain below the 1982 level."

*The French program began in December 1981 and aims todouble Frenchmachine-tool production, raising it to about $995million by 1986: One of the program's goals is to halve the 60percent import penetration of 1980 by the_middle of the decade.American Metal Market/Metalworking News;_Judy 25, 1983.

""The 13th American Machinist Inventory of MetalworkingEquipment 1983," American Machinist,November 1983.

4°John Rees, et al., 'The Adoption of New Technology in theAmerican Machinery Industry," Occasional Paper No 71, Max-well School of Citizenship and Public Affairs, Syracuse Univer-sity, August 1983.

"Commerce Department Foresees Metalworking Gains,"American Metal Market/Metalworng News, Jan. 2, 1984.

Structurally. the overall U.S. machine-toolindustry is likely to continue to contract. Thisshould happen because of the persistence ofheavy finaneial losses during the early 1980's,because of the movement of the U.S. firmsaway frorri clotheStic production of hardware;and because_im_port competition appears tohave eroded U.S. market share permanently;Also. lack of experience_ in manufacturing sys-tems and limited capability to develop soft-ware are likely to restrict entry into FMS andrelated businesses. It is possible that only thelargest companies may be able to develop theextensive Software and electronics expertiseneeded to Succeed in the systems market.

While thernathine-tool industry as a wholecontracts; the Ne_share of the industry willcontinue to grow. This will be hastened by theanticipated rapid decline in the cost premiumof NC relatiVe to conventional machine tools;It will also reflect market withdrawal of smalland iiiedium=Size firms unable to afford tomoderiiiie their products and facilities; In-Creasing Sophistication of IBC products and in-creased emphasis on. integrating NC equip-_merit into manufacturing systems; both ofwhich entail an ongoing infusion of computer/electronics technology, may make the fizturemachine-tool industry more of a "high-technol=ogy" industry than it has been How the industry will evolve depends on severatfacter8which bear on the competitiveness of the in=

dustry, such as new product and market (Seg-ment) development and increased efficiency.

Major Machine-tool builders have begtinmodernizing_ their own facilities; resorting inMany cases to greater use of programmableautomation. For example; the Wickes MachineTool Group, Inc., has arranged to purchaseCAD system to help it compete with largerfirths; Kearney and Trecker (Cross &Trecker)is installing one of its own FMSs; Brown &Sharpe Manufacturing CO. uses CAD to de-sign new prodticts and to translate plans for3-D products ineo.2-D patterns for sheet metalprocessing; and IngerS011 Milling Machine Co.has used CAD to develop a new FIVIS." But

"Amen-can Metal Market/Metalworkirrg News, various issues.

300

Ch. 7.Programmable Automation industries 285

the costs Of moderiiiiiiig in the context ofstrong import competition and a sluggish mar-ket may lead other firms to withdraw from themarket. Machine -tool blinders have also con-templated cooperative research ventures; andseveral companies have recently built new re-search facilities. For example, Cincinnati Mil-acron, Inc., has completed a new research cen-ter; Ex-Cell-0 has a new tethnbldgy Center;Monarch Machine Tool is- forming a new en-gineering development lab; and South BendLathe is adding a new engineering group forits research division.43

Rather than improve domestic plant andequipment, there is already evidence of a grow-ing reliance by. U.S. firma on foreign compa-nies, or On their Town production facilitiesabroad, for the hardware they sell. As memachine -tool- industry executive explained tothe International Trade Commission:

It is essential to distinguish between thefuture prosperity of American- companiesthat trade in machine tools and the future' prosperity of the domestic machine toolbuilding industry. Cross & Trecker is corn-nutted to the businesS of Machine tools, butit is not committed' to build in the UnitedStates all or any specific portion of the ma-chine tools it sells here."

Bendik, before deciding early M 1984 to divest,its industrial automation operations; plannedto introduce new moducts while shifting theproduction of Other products (small CNClathes and chuckeral to Japan, where it par-ticipated in a joint venture with Murata Ma-chinery Co. Also, it had invested in the Ital-ian firm Comau, which could have provided itwith hardware; and it had arranged to be theexclusive distributor of Toyoda Machine WorksNCAiiiichine tools in the United States andCanada. Acme- Cleveland and Cross & Ttetk;er have forged agreements with foreign firmsto supply equipment to replace or add to pr6c1;ucts already made and sold in the UnitedStatesi Another firm; Sulzer; has recently cho-

"-American Metal Market/Metalworking News, June 12, 1983;NMTBA Pet. Supp:

"Frosanne BrookS, "Tool Builders Consider Offshore Sites,"American Metal Market/Metalworking News, July 4, 1983.

sen to enter the U.S. market by selling Rai=ion equipment under license. On the otherhand; Cincinnati Milacron officials have statedthat they plan to continue to produce com-modity machinery; in part because advancesin machine-tool technology make control overthe design -of both hardware and controls im-portant.'" Yet some of their equipment maybe produced in their European facilities. In-terestingly, the willingness of leading U.S.machine-tool builders to move offshore sug-gests that they do not believe that PA tech-nOltigy albne Would sufficiently lower theirown production costs.

Three principal areas of new product devel,opment that may benefit the domestic ihdua=try are products for processing nonmetal ma=terials, products aimed at smaller users, andmanufacturing integration. Products for proc-essing nonmetal materials include machineryfor processing plastics; especially compositematerials (Used increasingly by the aerospaceindustry). Thegrowing substitution of plasticsfor metals in the aircraft; motor vehicle; andappliance industries, among others; is feeding,long-term groWth in plastics machinery sales.Cincinnati Milacron, for example; not onlymakes computer- controlled plastics moldingmachinery but offers robotic Cells for plasticsproduction and equipment for producing andinspecting items made with composites. Otherequipment may be aimed at processing ceram-ics, used increasingly by the auto and aero-space industries, in particular.

There are several reasons why machine-toolfirms May aim to serve smaller customers; Oneis that the huge automotive and commercialaerospace purchases of the late 1970's are notlikely to be repeated; thus, defense spendingand small firms may become key forces in themarket.* An argument for growth in small-user demand is increased competition among

"Bruce Vernyi, "Machine Builders Look Co New TechnologyProducts: Some ConcedeStandard Lines to Foreign Firms,American Metal Market/Metalworking News, June 13, 1983.

*Note that_offsetoproduction, and other agreements teeincreasing the foreign production component of 11.S. civil andmilitary aircraft, a trend that adversely affects U.S. parts sup-pliers and presumably constrains U.S. machinery demand.

301

286 Computenz id Manulactunng Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

smaller metalWorking firms for business; atrend indicated both by OTA case studies andby Other evidence. The benefits of NC in termsOf improved production reliabi&y; better cost

.estimation, and faster production time may be-come increasingly attractive to smaller usersfacing high competition for machining work.On the other hand; since small manufacturerswere the principal victims of the past recesssions, their spending capacity is uncertain.

Other motivations include the possibility oftighter litIks between prime manufacturersand subcontractors in the automobile and aer,ospace industries. These links are associatedWith such inVentiory:control strategies as thejuat=inztime system, which tends to be accom-panied by single-sourcing of supplies, and withthe spread of programmable automation itself,Which encourages direct computer links be-tween manufacturers and suppliers. The Na-tional Tooling and Machining Association(NTMA), for example; has arranged seminars be-

tween major auto produeers and metalworking__ suppliers to facilitate the transition to PA. The

possibility of closer linka with their custom-ers may spur metalworking and other suppli-ers to modernize their facilities; in effect, sucha requirement may be imposed on them.

Though smaller users offer a_potential kirmarket expansion, the primary U.S. competi=tive strength continues to be in larger, morecomplex systems; This is one reason why ma-chine -tool builders may seek to procure smallerproducts from foreign sources. Lodge andShipley; for example, has begun to marketsmall CNC lathes from Italy. Strength -in largesystems is also a reason why major NC pro-ducers are likely to ftirther emphasize inte-grated manufacturing, through supply of man-ufacturing cells, FMS, and other integratedsysteina, and through the production ofrobota.Croaa & Trecker, for example; recentlyfornied a divisiOn to produce automated ma-terialS;handling devices. It also acquired Ben-dix' Operations for industrial controls; machinetools, and robots.

Machine-tool bUilders may continue to ex-pand into robot production because, amongother reasons, tObbts can complement machine

tools or accessories (e.g., loaders; changers)*Rhin FMS or other settings; Also; transfer-line§ and other special machine-tool productsare expected to be more flexible and capableOf producing small lots and component fami=lies economically: -They will include advancedcomputer control and monitoring; sensors, andauto-n --aced functions for stock delivery, gang;ing, roading, and removal of broken tools."

While NC producers may supply integratedsysterns by making key components and soft-ware themselves, it is also possible that theymay adopt a turnkey approach, assemblingcomponents made by a variety of companies.As NC machine-tool builders become betterable to match machine tools with controls, andas users seek to standardize the controls theyuse, machine -tool builders may become in=creasingly willing and able to offer their equip=ment with a variety of options for controls."Turnkey operation _is also more likely if NCfirms continue to diminish their domestic pro,duction and focus more on machine-tool dis-tribution. On the other hand, machine-toolbuilders may establish links with such firmsas IBM, GE, or Westinghouse, supplyinghardware which those firms would package forsale with engineering services, controls, andsoftware.

Control makers themselves are already in-volVed in the integration field. Allen-Bradley,for example, offers an "area control" systemto integrate management and operation ftinc-dons. It is working with 3M and Western Dig-ital to develop a broadband local area networkthat would allow a wide range of manufactur-ing devices to communicate. Both systemswould accommodate equipment from differentvendors, making integration more accessibleto users.

Regardless of how much hardware NC sup-pliers build themselves, their nonproductionactivities will continue to increase. This trend

"Al Wrigley, "Versatile Tranifer Lines," Americtut MetalMarket/MetaiworIcing News, Aug. 15, 1983. Liitiri Gieseti;"Transfer Lilt° Design is Changing Rapidly," American MetalMarket Metalworking. News; Aug. 1_5; 1983,

"See, for example, "Bridgeport Shows _Tools," AmericanMetal Market/Metalworking News, Sept. 20; 1982;

10.

Ch. 7.Programmable Automation Industries 287

is due in part to the large need for support ac-tivities associated with the design and imple-mentation of complex systems like FMS. Suchsystems require extended (2 to 5 years) plan-ning by users, whether for retrofit or new-facility installations. NC producers havebegun to establish service units that advisecustomers in the planning for and design ofautomated systems. For example, severalfirms, including Cincinnati Milacron andAllen-Bradley, now have automation consult-ing units.

Future trade trends in the NC industry aredifficult to predict, although the status of theU.S. market as the largest machine-tool mar-ket in the world (followed by the U.S.S.R.,West Germany, and Japan) suggests that for-eign competition will persist. Key factors bear-ing on U.S.-Japan competition are the pros-pects for protectionist action by the UnitedStates and of voluntary export curbs initiatedby the Japanese, although the Japanese al-ready have large inventoriespositioned in theUnited States. More generally, other factorsaffecting trade patterns include the develop-ment of foreign markets, and changes in U.S.customer demand. For example, Ford's shiftfrom turning to milling of crankshafts offersnew opportunities to foreign machine-toolfirms, which already produce for this applica-tion (unlike U.S. firms)." Other changes in cus-tomer products and processes may also affectthe competitive balance. Finally; competitionin NC will depend on the relative similarity ofnational preferences. For example, Japanesevendor and users appear to prefer relativelysimple FMSs, while U.S. companies appear toprefer more sophisticated systems." If NCsales, including FMS, become increasinglyoriented toward integrated systems, the tradi-tional U.S. strength in software and systemstechnologies may prove to be an enduringadvantage.

' "Jack Thornton, "Ford Engine Plant to Mill Rather ThanTurn Cranks," American Metal Market/Metalworking News,Sept, 20, 1982.

"" In FMS, Simplicity Governs," American Meted Market-working News, Japanese Machine Tool Supplement, July 11,1983.

RobotsHistory

The role of entrepreneurs, and the absenceof a major government role, distinguish theearly development of the robotics industryfrom that of other PA technologies. After Uni-mation installed the first commercial robot in1961 in the auto industry, sales were negligi-ble for about a decade. With a virtual monop-oly, Unimation had sold only 200 robots by1970.5° One other firm, Versatran (now partof Prab Robots), also sold a few robots dur-ing that first decade. Several other firms in-vestigated robotics technology during the1960's without entering the market.

By the mid-1970's, robot sales in the UnitedStates had risen to about $15 million. Cincin-nati Milacron and DeVilbiss (machine-toolbuilders), Autoplace_(Copperweld Robotics,until sold in early 1984), Prab Conveyors (amaterials handling equipment maker, whichbought out Versatran and became Prab Ro-bots), and Swedish-owned ASEA had becomesignificant vendors, although Unimation re-mained the leader. Cincinnati Milacron andASEA developed their own robots, but theyalso licensed technology from Unimation,"while DeVilbiss sold robots licensed fromTrallffa (of Norway). The automobile industrywas the principal customer; buying robots forapplications such as spot welding and spraypainting. Figure 31 shows market growthtrends.

Major investment programs by automobilemanufacturers led the growth in demand forrobots in the late 1970's. Although the autoindustry was already heavily automated; vol-atile consumer demand and variable proiluc-tion runs created a growing problem of pre-mature obsolescence of plant and equipment.These factors, plus foreign competition, gen-erated4rressure to reduce costs as well as in-crease flexibility and quality in production.

'Tackling the Prejudice Against Robots,"Business Week.Apr. 26, 1976.

""Robot Makers Still Waiting for Promised Big Markets,"Electronic Business; October 1980:

288 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

The phases of the robot industry

Figure 31.Robot Market TrendsMarket share: startup companies only; 1980-83

1961 Mid-1970's 1979 1982

Changes in market share composition, 1986 -83

1980

1982

'Unimation. Cincinnats Milacron, DeVilbiss, Moo Inc., Prab Robots Inc,Copperwerd Robotics

SOURCE PrudontialBacho Securities, Inc

3o

1980 1981

Advanced Robotics Corp.American Robot Corp.AUtomatiX Inc:Control AutomationIntelledexMachine Intelligence Corp.Nova RoboticsU.S. Robots

1982 1983

1983

Ch. 7.Programmable Automation Industries 289

Substitution for less flexible equipment, andthe reduction of labor costs, were both majormotivations for automotive use of robots. Bylate 1980; 1,400, or nearly half of the 3,200robots Unimation had installed, were for spot-welding applications.52

The potential market for robots in theaerospace and electronics industries was alsoexplored during the 1970's. The aerospace in-dustry, unlike the automobile industry, con-tained relatively few obvious applicaticinS, be-cause aircraft are very high-precision prodnetSproduced in small batches; early robots tendedto be insufficiently precise and relatively ex=pensive to adapt for each use. During the midto late 1970's, DOD programs (e.g., ICAM)aimed at improving defense procurement rnoti=vated the evaluation, perfection, and adoptionof robots by large aerospace firms working inconjunction with government and universityresearchers (see ch. 8). Although DOD tech-nology-diffusion programs also evaluated theuse of robots for electronics applications, theelectronics industry was largely responsiblefor developing its own early applications.Firms such as Texas Instruments and IBMdeveloped robots and applications in suchbroad areas as materials handling and simpleassembly.

Foreign firms have participated in robotmarkets since the 1960's. The Japanese indus-trytry grew bigger and at a faster rate than theU.S. industry.* This happened in part becausethe Japanese Government encouraged robotuse by small and medium-sized firms; throughsuch measures as a robot leasing program (seech. 9). The typically close links between ma-jor Japanese manufacturers and their suppli-ers also served to promote growth in smEdlerfirm use of robots. In 1968, Kaiv_asfiki licensedrobot technology from Unimation, becomingthe first and leading Japanese producer.

"I bid.--

*Japanese robot production (not necessarily restricted Lb U.S.robot definition) grew from 200 units ($1.6 million) in 1968to 8.600 units ($8.7 million) in 1977 -and 19,387 units ($314 mil-lion) in 1980. "Japanese Production Runs Limit Robotic In-vestroents,"A viation Week and Space Technology; Aug 2;1982.

aneSe vendors proliferated, as companies thathad earlier built robots for their own use (e.g.,Pentel, Seiko) entered the external domesticmarket. Across a relatively broad range ofindustries and firm Sizes, Japanese firmsadopted robots and other forms of automationrelatively quickly because of a shortage ofskilled, entry-level labpr in Japanese manufac-turing industries, particularly those indus-tries in which production work was consideredonerous.

.Dunng and since the 1970's, other majorproducers of robots have appeared in variousEuropean countries. Trallfa of Norway is a ma-jor producer of spraying robots; its technolo-gy is licensed to DeVilbiss. ASEA of Swedenis a major producer of are-welding robots; it11E18 a U.S. subsidiary and operates in severalother countries. Vendors based in_ France,Italy, West Germany, the United Kingdom,and other European countrieS, where indige-nous industries tended to develop around thelocal auto industries, also began to sell robotsin the United States.

Recent/ContemporaryThe robot market has reportedly grown to

exceed $200 million in sales in the UnitedStat.08, and perhaps $1 billion worldwide.* Therobot business, however, remains unprofit-able=the growth of sales has been describedby Laura Conigliaro, a financial analyst of therobot industry, as "profitless prosperity." Oneindustry participant recently compared theestimated $200 million in 1982 sales withabout $500 million in costs.53 The ITC con-

Industry analysts estimate that 1982 sales were $2Q0 Mil-lion, while 1983 sales are believed to approach $240 Million.The International Trade Commission estimated that 1982 U.S.sales by domestic firms alone were under $140 million. Notethat it is hard to measure sales and, profits because most ven-dors are privately held or are smell parts of large companiesthat do not break out sales data Therefore, industry analystsgenerally seek to count units sold and estimate sales based onaverage price. AVerage price, however, will vary depending oncustomer preferences for accessories and other items accom-panying the sale of the basic manipulator.

"Laura Conigliaro and Christine Chien, "Computer Inte-grated Manufacturiog," : report of the April 1983 Prudential-Bache Securities Symposium on ComputerIntegrated Manu-facturing, Prudential-Bache Securities, Aug. 2, 1983.

290 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

eluded from its industry survey that robotvendors lost money through the 1979-83 pe-riod." There are several reasons for this situa-tion; which stems from the immaturity of themarket. Vendors are trying to position them-selves in a nascent market; they often deliverproducts they have yet to perfect; and usersoften require extremely high levels of serviceand supportto make an application SuCcessful.Consequently; high costs for marketing, ap-plications development; support, and produc-tion of special tooling erode profits from. ro-bot sales. Table 58 lists shipment estimatesfrom ITC (note that since 1980, shipmentshave included a significant fraction of robotsfor instructional purposes)."

Among users; the auto industry continuesto dominate; other major users in-chide aero-space, electronics; machinery, foundries, andmiscellaneous light mantifaCtiiting (see table59). Among applications; spot welding, ma-chine loading; spray painting, and materialshandling are most prevalent, although arcwelding; inspection, and assembly applicationsare. becoming more common, in part becauseof a growth in sensor tedinOlogy, especially

"''Competitive Position of U.S. Producers of Robotics in Do-meatic aid World, Markets;" U.S. International Trade Commis-sion, Publication 1475. December 1983:

vision systems, for robots. From 70 to 80 per-cent of robots in the auto industry are usedfor welding.

Because the robot market holds the prospectof eventual profits, U.S. robot vendors haveproliferated since 1980. While Unlined= andCincinnati Milacron still lead the market, theyface competition from a diverse set of marketentrants, including small, innovative startupfirms and large, diversified multinationals.There are about 100 U.S. vendors, comparedwith about 250 in Japan and several dozen inEurope.56 * The market includes both full -linefirms and niche firms. The strongest compet-itors offer a range of products. In addition torobot assemblers, there are other firms concen-

"See, for example: Laura Conigliaro, "Trends in the RobotIndustry (Revisited): Where are We Now?" 13th InternationalSympogiTm on Industrial Robots and Robots 7 conference pro-ceedings, Robotics International of SME, Apr. 17-21, 1983.

*Also, there are at least 30 Japanese firms that produce ro-bots only for themselves and their shareholders. Paul_Aron,"The _Robot Scene in Japan: An Update," Paul Aron ReportNo 26, Daiwa Securities America, Inc., Sept. 7, 1983. It is notclear how many U.S. firms produce for their own use althoughIBM and Texas Instruments are etamples of firms believed todo so, Square D, for example, is an electrical equipment makerthat bought a young robotics firm, U.S. Robots, Inc., (whichproduces "Maker robots) to obtain robots for its own small-part production, The ITC concluded from its industry surveythat only 6% of shipments were intracompany (captive). Theprevalence of user-producers in Japan accounts for the greaternumber of special-purpose robots in Japan.

Table 58.=Robota: U.S. Producer's Domestic Shipments; by Types, 1979.83

Type 1979 -1980 1981 1982 1983.

Quantity (units)

Spot welders 155 344 644 434 372

Arc welders 28 52 57 91 196

Coaters 0 0 26 156 153

Assemblers and materialhandlers'' ........ 114 153 259 550 1,025

Metalworking apparatus 4 7 10 16 15

Loaders/unloaders 79 111 167 163 ; 188

Others' 63 141 344 697 _____ 717

Total 443 808 1,507 2,107 9,668

Value (1,000 dollarS)

Total° 19,168 43,293 90,076 122 X23 134,916

Unit Value

Average $ 43,267 $ 53,580 $ 59,772 $ 58,150 $ 50,606

''Data for 1983 are based on projections provided by U S producersData are combined to prevent disclosure - -

Includes small mstruciion_aLand educational-Data by types are not available

SOURCE Compiled from datasubmitted ti-.response to questionnaires Of the U S"

International Trade Commission.

Ch. 7,Prograrnmabte Automation industries 291

Table 59.U.S. Robot Population by Application and Industry, End of 1982

Auto

Nonmetalslight

Fottattlfc-4-atii.ifettUrer

Electrical;elec-

tronics

Heavy!equpment:

Aero-space Total

Weldin_g1 : 2200 (35%)Material handling 1 1 1 1550 (259/a)Machine loading t2 2 2 1250 (20%)Spray painting, finishing 3 3 3 1 600 (10%)Assembly 2 2 200 (3%)Machining 100 (29/0)Other _300 (5%)Total 2500 1250 1050 71/0 6110 100 6200 (100%)

(40%) (20%) (17%) (11 %) (109/0)- (2%)'About 70 to 80 percent of robots in auto industry are used for welding.SOURCE Tech Iran Corp.

trating on ancillary producti such as end-of-arm tooEng, motors, and other components forrobots. Finally, not all vendora produce theirwares: probably only about 50 U.S. firms ac-tually produce robots." Competition is in-tense, and some firms have already exited themarket (e.g., Black & Decker, Kulicke & Sof-fa).58 Copperweld Corp. left the robot marketafter recent losses on robotics systems and vi-sion products, although it was considered thelargest U.S. maker of small robots when it -en-tered the market in 1979 (via acquisition). Sim-ilarly, Nordson Corp. is planningto divest therobotics division it formed in 1980.

Entry into the market has occurred throughlicensing of foreign technology, mergers, andacquisitions, as well as through new-productdevelopment. GE, for example, entered in 1981by licensing Italian and Japanese-designedrobots. GCA and Automatix are among themany ' companies that distribute Japaneserobots under their own names, and at least oneAmerican firm has licensed a Scottish-de-signed robot." * Cross-fertilization, throughlicensing, outsourcing, joint ventures, or otherMeans, is a key feature of this market (see this=

"-See "Competitive Position of U.S. Producers of Roboticsin Domestic and World Markets," U.S. International TradeCommission, Publication 1475, December 1983:

"Kulicke & Soffa had formed a new division and invested overSi ninon in robotics research over a 2-year period. gee "Reces-sion Even Hits Robots," The New York Times, Jan. 12, 1983.

""Cameron Gets Robot License," American Metal MrT.rket/Metalworking News, June 6; 1983:

Bendix, for example; distributed three Yaskawa robot sys-tems in the Western Hemisphere under the Bendix name andprovided support and services. Wall Street Journal; Dec. 7;1982.

cussion below). Several vendors even offerrobots using the same basic manipulators."The prevalence of cooperative efforts is notsurprising given the fact that developing aprototype robot alone costs upwards of $1 mil-lion, while the full costs of market entry arecloser to $15 million to $20 million. The costsof entering and operating the buSiness are'even higher.

Several firms have been financed by ven-ture capital, although external financing is be-lieved to be less aYailable now than it was justa few years ago. Intelledex, for example, wasfounded in 1981 by .former Hewlett-Packardemployees using venture capital; it is devel-oping sophisticated robots with vision forelectronics assembly. ControLAutornaticro,founded at about the same time by formerWestern Electric personnel and funded by,ven-ture capital, also aims to serve the electronicsassembly market. As these exampleseuggeSt,several new firms draw on computer back;gmunds 'or emphasize electronics applications;this contrasts with the more mechanical orien-tation of most of the early vendors.

Robot producers supply robots as stand-alone devices with basic systems engineering,as custom-turnkey systems, or as modular-turnkey systems. As in; other PA markets,turnkey firms combine robotics componentsmade by others with controls, software, andtooling tailored to meet the requirements ofspecific applications. Robot systems are avail-

""Robotics: Too Many Firms for the Market?" The Journal .

of Commerce, Apr. 25, 1983.

3 7

292 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment; Education; and the Workplace

able based either narrowly on a robot or morebroadly on a manufacturing cell served_by arobot (e.g., as a machine tender/loader). Auto-matix, for example, was founded as a visioncompany that imported Japanese manipula-tors and sold them with vision systems of itsown design. It recently introduced a line ofrobotic assembly cells with vision systemsthat can be combined into a larger assemblysystem. Robot systems with vision capabili-ties have grown more common; 25 to 30 per-cent of machine vision systems sold are soldwith robots.6'

Both large, diversified vendors such as IBM,GE, and Westinghouse, and smaller ones suchas GCA and Cybotech, offer to integrate ro-bots or robotic systems with a variety of othertypes of production automation. Several ven-dors, such as GCA and IBM, offer to link CADunits to robots, allowing robots to be pro-gramed and applications to be simulatedthrough CAD systems. The strategy of someof these vendors is to treat robots as additionalterminals in larger, computer -based systems.Such systems can eliminate the need for sep-arate robot programing and related supportactivities.

While the manipulator the basic robot hard-ware) accounts for over half the total cost ofinstalling a robot (see fig. 32) the increased at-tention to controls, software, and service ac-companying the trend toward treating robotsas part of systems is reducing_the role of hard-ware in the robot business. As one industryparticipant observed:

To me, the robot system is probably fiftypercent controls and software and anothertwenty-five percent peripheral applicationand tooling and staging. And only twenty-

"'See Robert N. Stauffer. "Sensors: 50,000 Machine VisionSystems Seen by 1992,"_Robotics TodaY, April 1983: Tech 'Franestimates that as of early 1983,-only 400 to 500 machine tri-sion systems were in use but up to 50.000 systems may be usedby 1993; Machine vision systems currently cost $25,000 to$39.000 but may cost less than $10,000_ by 1993.

The vision system market is belieVed to contain over 100suppliers. Vision system sales have been estimated at $18 mil-lion to $25 million in 1982; and forecast to grow rapidly dur-ing the mid to late 1980'S.

five percent of it is the basic robotic mecha-nism that you 000.62

Thus, at the Robot 7 exposition, for exam-ple, Cincinnati Milacron demonstrated onlythree robot models and one control unit, avail-able with different options. The hardware wasstandardized, but different customer needscould be met by varying the software.

For both simple and complei applications,pre- and post-sale support and Service are in-creasingly considered essential by both yen-dors and users. One indicstor that service andsupport have been inadequate is the fact thatbuyers have occasionally abandoned robots,something that has not been a problem forCAD systems and other types of progrEumna-ble automation. A lot of pre-sale supportplanning, training, facilities preparation,etc.is often _needed, for a couple of reasonsin particular: Robots have yet to be viewed asthe only, alternative for certain tasks (unlike,say, lathes); and there are no single; correctapproaches to applying robots in given situa-tions. Because robot technology is still devel-oping, and because users often adopt their firstrobots as a preliminary to broader processChange, poSt-sale supporte.g., software up=dateS, service contractsis also _important.While early robot vendors (e.g., Unimation,Prab, and Cincinnati Milacron) initially fo-cused on manipulator' production, growingcompetition has made service increasingly im-portant to the business.

Some vendors have altered their pricing pat-terns in recognition of this situation, althoughpricing etrategies appear to vary toomuch topermit meaningful inferences. For example,rather than offer a $100,000 robot, a vendormay now offer the "robot" for $30,000 and8upportiservice for $70,000. Indeed, some in-dustry analysts have somewhat cynically ob-served that selling robots is analogous to giv-ing away (virtually) razors and profiting from

"'Laura_ Con4liaro and Christine Chien, "Computer In-tegrated Manufacturing," report of the April 1983 Prudential-Bache Securities Symposium on_Computer;Integrated Manufac-turing, Prudential -Bache Securities, Aug. 2, 1983.

Ch. 7.Programmable Automation Industries 293

Installation

Accessories(e.g. gripper)

Basicrobot

Figure 32.Typical Robot System Cost Breakdown

Accessories(28%) !,

All robotsS160

Welding

SOURCE Tech Tran Corp

Material Machinehandling loading

Spraypainting

$130

$26(20%)

Assembly Machining

309

tr

$115

Allrobots

294 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment; Education, and the Workplace

the sale of razor blades: the money is in thefollow-on sales of complementary products.Another interpretation is that vendors haveyet to offer products that users really want.In particular; there is some evidenCe that userswant simpler systems.63

Large and small system-oriented vendorshave responded to perceived needs for serv-ice by enlarging their service capacity, and byadding systems-planning consulting units. Forexample, IBM has a Robotics Assembly In-stitute; GCA has two demonstration centers;Prab has a systems engineering unit; and GEhas a few robot applications centers. In addi-tion, third-party robotics consulting/servicefirms have emerged; These include Productiv-ity Systems; Inc; (Mich.); Ceeris International,Inc. (Conn.); Franklin Institute Research Lab-oratories; Inc. (Pa.); Seientific Applications,Inc; (Va.); and Automation Systems/AmericanTechnologies (N.J.). Third-party or non-manufactuimg firms_have a place in the roboticsbusiness, as in the CAD business, because thehardware is lessimportant than the applicationsengineering, software development, and otheraspects that combine in an application (see CIMsection below). These firms may also becomemore prominent because the amount of capi-tal available for new-start manufacturers isShrinking, and consulting is less expensive tolaunch than manufacturing.

The robot market continues to be stronglyinternational, although it is believed that ro-bot imports comprise less than 10 percent ofthe market." This compares with a 25 to 30percent import penetration for automobiles.According to ITC, U.S. imports of completerobots grew in value from $3.8 million m 1979to $15.1 million in 1982 and may have grownto $28.9 million in 1983. Imports of robot partsand subassemblies grew from $126,000 in 1979to $6.7 million in 1982 and may have grownto $15.2 million in 1983. According to Paul

"See, for example: Frank Cogan, "Some Robots Being Sim-plified to Attract Users;!_American Metal Market/Metalworking News, Sept. 13, 1982:

"Laura Conigliaro and Christine Chien, "Computer Inte-grated Manufacturin&" report of the April 1983 Prudential-Bache Securities- symposium on Computer-Integrated Manufac-turing, PrudentilkBache Securities, Aug. 2, 1983.

Aron of Daiwa Securities America, Inc., 425units valued at about $11.4 million were im-pOrt6d in 1982, of which 59 percent came fromJapan, compared with a total of $195 millionin domestic production."

Japan has been the principaLsource of robotimports; Sweden and Norway follow, togetheraccounting for less than half of the value ofJapanese imports.- Sweden follows Japan andthe United States as the third largest robotproducer. Its principal robot manufacturer,ASEA, is a leading, maker of industrial ma-chinery. ASEA produces about half of Swe-den's robot output. The remaining portion ofimports (about 20 percent by value, 9 percentby volume) comes from West Germany, Italy,and the United Kingdom. These countries pri-marily supply robots to the United Statesthrough resale agreements. Five firms producemost of West Germany's robot output. Thetwo leading German firms are VolkswagenWerk and Kuka." Several foreign firms servethe U.S. market by specializing in niches (e.g.,ASEA, Yaskawa, and Hitachi in arc welding),and most others serve the low end of themarket.

U.S. robot makers also export, principallyto European countries. ITC estimates thatU.S. robot exports grew from $8.9 million in1979'to $20.3 ninon in 1982 and may havegrown to $33.7 million in 1983, accounting- for-__20 percent of the shipments."

A principal difference between foreign anddomestic firms, until recently, has been theprevalence of user-producers among foreignfirms. The greater experience of foreign firms(particularly Japanese firms) with robotic ap-plications has been an important selling point.Also, the larger market in Japan helps to lowerthe cost of Japanese robots exported to theUnited States. And "the Japanese also are

"Paul Aron, "The Robot Scene in Japan: An Update,_" PaulAron Report No. 26, Daiwa Securities America, Inc., Sept. 7,1983.

" "Competitive Position of U.S. Producers of Robotics inDomeetic and World Marketa," U.S. International Trade Com-nvission, Publication 1475, December 1983:

67"Competitive Position of U.S. Producers of Robotics in Do-mestic and World Markets," U.S. International Trade Commis-sion, Publication 1475, December 1983.

3i0

Ch. 7.Programmable Automation industries 295

willing to make use of less sophisticated robotsrather than wait for the most perfect design.. . . In Japan, the stress is constantly on theapplication. "68

The international dimensions of robotindustry are complicated by the prevalence ofcaptive imports, licensing (often involvingthe manufacture abroad of key hardware), andjoint ventures. Licensing is a particularly at-tractive vehicle for foreign firms wishing toenter a remote market because it eliminatesthe need for setting up a new distribution sys-tem; it appeals to the licensee, on the otherhand, as a quick and easy means of enteringa new market. R&D needs are lower, as areproduction costs. Many U.S. vendors, fromlarge, diversified firms (e.g., IBM, GE) tosmaller, innovative firms (e.g., GCA, Auto-atix), license manipulators; especially fromJapan* (see table 60). As Phillipe Villers, Presi-dent of Automatix, recently noted:

"Paul Aron, "How to Play Catchup in Robotics," Electron-ics, June 16, 1983.

*Other countries also supply robot hardware. For example,Steelweld Robotic Systems (United Technologies) sells robotsystems using N-iko robots made in West Germany and- acces-sories and peripheral equipment made in the United States.Automotive News, Sept. 26, 1983.

If you are going to produce something inmuch lower volumes than a competitor; thenyou had better be able to command a premi-um for some innovative aspect's . . . Now, inrobotic arms as distinguished from the robotas a whole; that isirrelEtWelyinature art; andthe opportunity for commanding a tremen-dous premium for a bettter arm is somewhatlimited. At the present time; the leading Jap-anese manufacturers are producing arms inthe thousands per year in a number of cases.For manufacturers here to compete in armswhile producing ten times less of that device;the laws of economics says that you can'tproduce it as cheaply . . . In the controls areait's not the same."

Finally, there are a growing number of inter-national joint ventures, although these remainless common than licensing agreements. Forexample, Renault of FranCe and Ransburg ofthe United States formed Cy- botech in the late1970's. A new joint venture, GMF Robotics,paired a major Japanese producer, Fanuc Ltd.,with a major U.S. user, GM. Although its

"Laura Conigliaro and Cluistthe 'Computer Inte-grated Manufacturing," report of the April_1983 Prudential,-Bache ,3curities Symposium on Computer - Integrated Manufac-turing, Prudential-Bache Securities, Aug. 2, 1983.

Table 60.Soine Agreements Existing Between U.S. and Foreign Robotics Producers

From Type of agreement TO

DEA (Italy) License and marketingVolkswagen (West Germany) License and marketingHitachi Ltd. (Japan' License and marketingFujitsu Fanuc (Japan)* Joint ventureUnimation LicenseUnimation LicensePrab Robots, Inc. ManufacturingPrab Robots, Inc. ManufacturingPrab Robots, Inc. ManufacturingTrallfa (Norway) LicenseRenault (France)* ...........Joint ventureYaskawa Electric (Japan) MarketingYaskawa Electrfc (Japan)* Technology exchangeSankyo Seiki (Japan) PurchaseKomatsu (Japan) License and marketingMitsubishi Electric (Japan) License and marketingOlivetti Mali; License and marketingBasfer (Italy) License and marketingDalnichi Kik° (Japan) MarketingHitachi Ltd. (Japan) MarketingNachi Fujikoshi (Japan) LicenseNimak (West Germany) LicenseASEA (Sweden) Subsidiaryrirninnati Milacron Manufacturing

General Electric Co.General Electric Co.General Electric Co.General Motors Corp.-Kawasaki Heavy Industries (Japan)Nokia (Finaind)Fabrique Nationale (Belgium)Murata Machine (Japan)Canadian English Co. (Canada)DeVilbiss Co.RansburgHobart BrothersMachine Intelligence Corp.IBMWestinghouse ElectricWestinghouse ElectricWestinghouse ElectricNordsonGCAAutomatixAdvanced Robotics Corp.United TechnologiesASEA, Inc

Kiko (Japan)alnformatlon and technology flow in both directions.SOURCE: Compiled from various sources by the staff of the US. International Trade Commission.

25-452 0 84 20 : QL 3 311

2g6 Computerized Manufacturing Automation:, Employment, Education, and the Workplace

i

management claims to aim for no more than50 percentof sales for automotive application,GMF appears to be gaining a major share ofGM's robot business. GM's new Buick complex in Flint, 'Mich., for example, will include103 robotsall from GMF.7°

International joint ventures are alsoa fac-tor in foreign markets. For_example, Cincin-nati Milacron and Utsumi Machinery Co. (Ja-pan) will produce robots in 'Japan this year forsale in Asia and AuStralia. Cincinnati Mila-cron's Japanese subsidiary Will_ assemble therobots &Om/manipulators made by Utsumiand Cincinnati Milacron controllers made inthe United States. Cincinnati Milacron claimsthat building the manipulators in Japan willcost about 20 percent less than building themin _the_United States.71 Lower production costsreflect, impart_, the exchange rate, as well ashigher production volumes in Japan.

i

Likely Change-iEstimates of the 1990 U.S. robot poptilation1-generally range from 50,000 to 150,000, or a

6- to 18-fold increase relative to today. Salesforecasts for 1990 typically range-from $1 bit=lion to. $2 billion. Clearly,_ changes of these1-magnitudes are uncertain; they depend, in par-ticular, on a strong economy. A "shakeout"in the robot industry, with the number of ven-dor4 falling at the srtnie time sales are 'grow-ine is widely anticipated within the industryan among analysts; Because the nature ofpr uction costs; the rate of technologych

1-ge; and the growth of the market are all

..uncertam, there is 'controversy as to the pros-p4ts of new v. old firms; or large_ v. smallfirms (see table 61). During a recent forum forindustry participants; the problem was under-

4 .scored when representatives of .several smallrObotmanufacturers.expresSed their desire tobe the "IBM of robotics." Because both large

t 1and small firms have strengths, and becausethe market is expectet&to broaden, it is.likely

"Stuart Brown, "Accurate Fixturing Not Required for Vision-equipped Robot System," American Metal Market'lVfetalwork-i g News, Nov. 7, 1983:

'''Cincinnati Milacron lans to Have Robots Made in Japan1984," The Wall Streei Journal. Sept. 12, 1983.

that the industry will support both large,"supermarket" suppliers of automation andsmaller firms oriented toward robot niches.Moreover, large diversified firmsespeciallythose supplying a variety of types of program-mable automationmay persist in the robotmarket even without earning profits therebecause (as with FMS) identification with therobot industry has strategic value.

Growth in applications will be a key tobroadening the market:- The rate at which ro-bot use spreads to nonrnetalworking indus-tries will depend on many factors, includingbroad-based changes in manufacturing proc-esses and standardization of equipment, lan-guages, and, interfaces (which may occur in-formally through the emergence of dominantproducts and vendors). :Both growth in appli7cations and reductions in cost should expandthe market among small firms, in particular;at present, single-robot purchases are usuallyhard to justify:on financial grounds.72 Materi-als handling; assembly; and inspection applica-tions; which can be found in virtually all man-ufacturing industries; will grow during thisdecade, in part because of advances ,fin sens-ing and adaptive control (see ch. 3).

Robots are already considered feasible formaterials handling in iLpplications rangingfrom textile processing and apparel manufac-ture to personal-care product packaging, phar-maceuticals, and cigarette packaging. GCA,for example, is providing robots for materialshandling in the printing and paper packagingindustry. Assembly applications are becom-ing more common and diverse; especially inthe electronics industry, with applicationsranging from wire-harness assembly to inser-tion of components into circuit boards. Sub-stantial markets for robots may also growduring the 1990's in nonmanufacturing applications, from battlefield missions to disposalof hazardous wastes to health-care servicesand food processing. Forestry, fishery, mining,agricultural, and oceanographic applicationsare also under development.

"Steven M. Miller, "Potential Impacts of Robotics on Man-ufacturing Cost within Metalworking Industries," DoctoralDissertation, Carnegie-Mellon University, 1983.

312

Ch. 7.Programmable Automation Industries 297

Table 61.--Prospects of Different Claases of Robot Vendors

StartupsStrengths: 2sk,

Few if any perceived or real dissatisfactions amongend-users.Ability to attract and hire some of the most aggressive andsmart individuals in robotics and related industries.Small size allows rapid shifts in strategies if necessary.(This wet:, particularly iroportant during the recession whencertain kinds of orders became scarce.)Technological advances will probably come from smallercompanies.Small starting base gleans that each order ofsize, is important. Tht_lt, the best of these companies wouldtent to offer more support for a given size order.The best of these companies have attracted important ven-ture capitalists. gaining impressive support and financialbacking.

Weaknesses:Little name recognition for some of them.Far more competitive environment In robotics than Isgenerally ideal for startups7---Le., little room for error or forlearning from mistakes.Cannot afford to be consistently agressive in pricing.Need some_ early successes in order to retain venturecapitalists. Otherwise cash flow insufficiency can becomea fatal disease.

Large company entrants:Strengths:

Name recognition.Major financial strength:In many instances, applications of robots and other flex-ibile automation technologies in their own factories is amarketin_g plus.Already offer a large variety of products other than robotsfor different aspects of factory automation.

Weaknesses:Power-ful financial strength for the corporation as a wholeshould not be interpreted as being equivalent to unlimitedfinancial resources for the robot unit. The commitment ofthe company to robotics and how robotics fits into the corn-pany's overall strategy for factory automation will vary.'(These commitments can diminish if the robot entity con-tinues to underperform expectations.)The robot entity is one tiny group within _the corporateorganization. Robotics alone will make no difference to theprofitability or growth of most of,these companies.Large cornpanies are often hampered by their own inertia.Inability to attract or keep aggressive entrepreneurial typesfor robot u9s: These 'duals often prefer the looserorganizational structt of smaller companies, where theycan also get an equity position.

SOURCE: Laura Conigliaro. -Trends in the Robot Industry (Revisited): Where Are We Now? Proceedings oi the 13th international Symposium on Industrial Robots,',April 1983.

Growth in systems applications and salesand advances in the automation of other pro-duction equipment will result ina rather smallmarket for stand-alone robots; at least withinmetalworking industries. Moreover, thesetrends may also make it easier for firms tosupply robots without manufacturing themthemselves. Whether they do or do not pro-duce manipulators, robot manufacturers areincreasingly likely to produce their own com-puter controls. Also, the software side of themarket should grow with software enhance-mentsfor sensing, diagnostics, and otherfunctions. The growth in systems applicationsand sales, the relative importance of controls,software, and customization, and the optionof relying at least in part on foreign sourcesof low-cost hardware suggest that product dif-ferentiation and service may be more impor-tant than pricing for competition within therobot market;

Future trade patterns in robots would ap-pear to depend on development of technologyfor new applications, prospects for continuedcooperative efforts among producers, and the

degree of emphasis placed on systems andservices. Table 62 contrasts the distributionof robot applications in Japan and the UnitedStates;

The greater use of robots for assembly, "in-telligent robots," and unsophistiCated unitsaimed at small firms in Japan may benefit Jap-anese imports later in the decade.* However,simple comparisons of numbers made andused may be misleading. Most assembly andintelligent robots are relatively unsophis-ticated at this time; Moreover; the Japaneseapparently consider U.S. assembly technologyto be superior to their own; The Japan Bcctnomic Journal notes that the IBM 7565 sys-tem robots introduced in early 1983 "seem tobe bett% than any factory assembly robots sofar commercially developed in Japan" becauseof superior software, programing, sensors, andcomputerization." Meanwhile, U.S. companies

*Japanese firms have recently expanded their efforts to reachsmall manufacturers (and restaurants and schools) by offeringrobots through department stores. Philadelphia Inquirer, July9, 1983:

""Robot Makers are Sensing Strong U.S. Competition,Va-pan Economic Journal, Feb. 8, 1983.

298 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: EmplOyment; Education; and the Workplace

Table 62.Installed Operating Industrial Robots by Application, Dec. 31, 1982(U.S. Definition)

Japan United States

UnitsBreakdownin percent_ Units

Breakdownin percent

Weldinga 8,052 25.2 2,453 38.9Painting 1,071 3.4 490 7.8Assembly 6,099 19.1 73 1.2Casting 557 1.7 875 13.9Materials handling 6;797 8.1 1,300 20.6Machine loading/unioading 2,578 8.1 1,060 16.8Others 6,746 21.2 50 0.8

Total 31,900 100 6,301 100

aJapan Industrial Robot Association reported separately arc welding (3,874) and spot welding (4,278). Robot Institute of America(U.S.) did not distinguish between these two categories.ROTE: These estimates are generally consistent with those of Table 59; the contrast illustrates the unreliable data problem.SOURCE: Paul Aron, "The Robot Scene In Japan: An Update," Daiwa Securities America Inc., Sept. 7, 1983.

have begun to sell more robots in Japan. Forexample; a young firm called American RobotCorp. has sold electronic assembly robots inJapan; and it will produce robots there througha Japanese subsidiary to increase Japanesesares (it hopes to lower costs and prices).

Access to foreign markets may become moredifficult and import competition may grow asa result of foreign policies supporting robots(and other forms of programmable automa-tion) as a favored domestic product (see ch. 9).Spurring the production and use of robots, ro-bot associations of various sorts exist in manycountries; including Australia, Belgium, theUnited Kingdom, Denmark, France, WestGermany, Italy; Japan, the United States,Singapore, Spain, Sweden, and China. Thesegroups often work with policymakers on issuesrelevant to robot teclmology development,sales; and trade. A Swedish committee, for ex-ample, has proposed a campaign to increaserobot production and use in Sweden, andSwedish-owned ASEA anticipates that robotswill supersede autos as the main nationalproduct."

France has even imported Japanese- assist-ance to develop its robot business. In responseto French Government_ requests for "Japanesecooperation in developing and introducing ro-

"Laura Conigliaro arid Christine Chien, "Computer Inte-grated-Manufacturing" report of the April 1983, Prudential-Bache aecurities Symposium on Computer- Integrated Miumfac-turing, Prudential-Bache &curities, Aug. 2, 1983.

hots and other high-technology products_as astep to revitalize the French economy," Yas-kawa Electric Manufacturing Co, (Japan) andCie Electro-mecanique (France) have_ teamed

Yaskawa will supply large robots for CEMto market in France; it will sell small CEMrobots in Japang and it will help CEM producelarge robots in France.75 Also, ASEA will pro-duce robots in France.

If robot systems grow in popularity; licens-ing may be the most effective way_for Japa-nese manufacturers to reach the U.S. market,because most of them are primarily manipu-lator builders; U.S. strengths,.by contrast, arein software and systems development. How-ever, Japanese producers are working on ro-bot systems of their own. For example, Sumi-tomo Shoji (a trading company), NEC (anelectronics firm), and Dainichi Kiko (a robotmaker) are developing robot systems with vi-sion and voice sensors for sale in 1984."

In the long term; U.S. manufacturers maybecome less interested inlicensing as they gainexperience in robotics, while the Japanese andothers may establish U.S. subsidiaries to bet-ter provide service and hardware packages andto adapt to potential or actual restrictions onimports. Hitachi, for example, has a U.S. sub-sidiary which recently formed several inde-

""J apan Agrees With France on Interchange of Robots,"Ja-pan Economic Journal, JIM. 11,1983.

"Roy Garner, ',/apanese Robot Industry Slows Down," Fi-nancial Times. Mar. 2, 1983.

31

Ch. 7.Programmable Automation Industries

pendent sales and service.centers to allow Hi-tachi to sell complete robot systems in theUnited States and to facilitate future robotproduction in the United States in the eventrobot imports are restricted. Hitachi now im-ports the basic robot and sells it with otherequipment (e.g., welding and painting devices)and services provided by U.S firms."

An emphasis on service or on integratingrobots into complex systkms would argueagainst a strong import presence (in the tra-ditional sense), because close relations withcustomers and retaining a local presence areimportant aspects of service provision and ap-plications planning. Emhart Corp., for exam-ple, chose to work with ASEA of America indeveloping its first robot application becauseof the geographic proximity of the vendor'sfacilities to its own. Also, U.S. experts believethat U.S. firms lead in systems technology.However, a movement toward turnkey supplyof systems is consistent with importation ofhardware and components, packaged by do-mestic firms. Japanese hardware, in particu-lar, is likely to grow more attractive as compe-tition in Japan lowers prices." Alternatively,foreign (and U.S.) firms may locate productionor assembly facilities in different markets.ASEA, for example, has robot plants in Japan,West Germany. Spain, Sweden, and the UnitedStates.

Other PA MarketsAutomated Materials Handling/

Storage/Retrieval SystemsAutomatad materials handling (AMH), stor-

age and retrieval systems (AS/RS) and theircomponents are supplied primarily by a fewfirms, which are typically suppliers of moreconventional materials handling eqtlipmantand systems, such as conveyors and convey-ing equipment (SIC 3535), hoists, overheadcranes, and monorails (SIC 3536), and indus-trial trucks (SIC 3537). Principal vendors in-

"Lauri Giesen, "Hitachi Offering Complete Robots in U.S,"American Metal Mrerket/MetWworking News, Apr: 25_, 1983.

""Matsushita Electric is Japan's Top Robot Maker," JapanEconomic Journal, May 24, 1983.

chide Eaton-Kenway, Esco/Hyster, LittoClark Equipment, Jervis B. Webb, andHandling Systems. AMH firms have }lista'cally served customers in the mining anwholesale/retail trade industries as wellmanufacturers, although products suchautomatic guided vehicles ("robot carts") haNrecently been developed with particular atteition to manufacturing-industry applicationAGV systems are already produced and usein Sweden, France, Italy, and West German:and British companies are also planning to e]ter the AGV market. The AS/RS market imore or less distinct from other AMH marketbecause the systems are more complex. Theare generally sold in packages of hardwarsoftware, engineering, and controls by firmoperating in turnkey fashion.

The overall materials handling industry hacontracted recently, in large part because cdeclining capital investment. Although _inports in the conveyor, hoist, and industriEtruck industries grew (in current dollars) b:14 to 20 percent in 1982, the ratio of importto new supply (imports plus domestic praduction) for each of these industries overall waless than 10 percent.76" However, there isgrowing tendency for foreign sourcing of hardware in these markets, as in others. And, fosome AMH products, import competition istrong. Makers of other PA equipment arientering the market, and some material:handling companies are expanding their involvement in order to have a stake in the manufacturing automation market as a wholeHarnischfeger Corp., for example, seeks to increase its materials handling business ancshift away from its predominant business itheavy equipment. It is hiring more ,engineersincreasing AMH R&D-and-applications engineering, and developing new controls for AMEsystems.8°

While spending for materials handlinEequipment is strongly tied to business invest.

Department of Corimeree, 1983 industrial OutlookNote that these figures may not capture larger penetration:for specific products.

"Lauri Giesen, "Harnischfeger Veers to Material Handling,'American Metal Market/Metalworking News, Jan. 16, 1984.

300 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

ment patterns in general; new interest amongmanufacturing firms in automating and link=ing materials handling, and production equip=ment will create new demand. Indeed, a iria=jor trade association; the Material HandlingInstitute; replaced their 1984 "AiitdiriatedMaterial Handling and Storage System Con=ference" with an "Integrated Systems Con=ference,, _and_ formed_aii_adViSdry "AdvanceTechnology Council."'" HoWever, Since FMSand other aspects of production integrationare still being &Veil:06d and are of limited use,highly integrated systems are not likely tohave a major infkiente on the materials handl-ing market during this decade. Also, AS/RShave tended to be practical only for very large-volume storage nee& and relatively frequentturnover of inventories, although smallersystems are being developed.

Manufacturing Resources Planning (MRP)and Other Management Systems

The market for MRP and Other Managementsystems is a part of the overall market formanagement software. The "'SW-ten-is havebeen sold to a wide range of firma, includingmetalworking; eleetroinda, and miscellaneousmanufacturing companies, firms which inmany cases are unlikely to buy. other, produc-tion types of prograirithable automation. Theyare sold by computer vendors, softwarehouses, engineering and other consultingfirms, and service bureaus. Professionalsocieties (e.g., the American Production andInventory Control_ Society) are important inpromoting the diffusion of such systems;

MRP systems are available primarily assoftware packages for mainframes and mini-

"-Newsletter," Mcidern Materials HicnOng-, April 9; 1984.

Computers. Sperry _Corp.; for example, offersa manufacturing control system with "mod-ules" for bill of materials generation and in-ventory control; manufacturing and purchase-order control; materials requirements planningfor scheduling; and productionosting and"shop-floor control" functions:"? Several othercompanies also offer such multifaceted sys-tems. Availability of minicomputer versions,and more recently microcomputer -based ty8=terns; has opened the market to more buyers`and sellers; Also; in many cases users developtheir own systems. Management softwareranges in price from under $1,000 for single-function, microcomputer packages to over$250;000 kr complex multifunction "MRP II"packages;"

Many vendors and consultants are hopingto increase their sales to smaller firms. Theavailability of micro-based systems in Partic:ular is expected to enlarge the small=firni Mar=ket. Digital Microsystems, Inc.; fbr example,offers an MRP system aimed at companieswith up to $25 million in sales._ The systein,offered-with-training, includes a local-area network; MRP software; and software for officeautomation and business graphics. As this ex-ample illustrates, vendors may try to meetcustomer needs with packages that simulta-neotislY computerize a number of functions.While the erratic prOduction flow of small;batth-Ornchietion firms makes planning forMRP challenging, the potential for increasedinventory control afforded by such systemsMay reduce the financial volatility typical ofsuch firms.

""Sperry Unveils Manufacturing Control System."Corilpii-ter-wortd; Dec 12; 19_83.

" "'Micro goftwareBrings Material Control to the Desk Top."Modern Materials Handling, Jan. 23, 1984.

Computer-Integrated Manufaauring:Potential Market Developments

A separate "CIM market" doe§ not exist.Although users of programmable automationare achieving greater integration of their

equipment, systems, and activities; and somevendors, in turn, are touting their ability toimplement CIM and meet diverse needs for

Ch. T.Programmable Automation industries 301

manufacturing integration, no one yet sells"CIM" as a total product nor has any vendorfully implemented CIM. Indeed, some in in-dustry contend that users are still pioneeringthe application of CIM. If needs remain highlyidiosyncratic (which is quite likely) and at-tempts at CIM few in number (which is possi-ble). most CIM may be developed by users; inthat case, a true market will not exist. Devel-opment by users is especially likely for largefirms; smaller firms may lack the resources todevelop their own systems (or to integrate pro-duction completely).

The fragmentation of PA supply among my-riad firms of different types and sizes may im-pede development of a CIM market, especiallyin the absence of standard equipment and in-terfaces. A spokesman for Caterpillar Tractor,for example, has argued that a major barrierto buying or using CIM is the 'absence ofstandard programing languages, data formats,communications protocols, teaching methods,controls, and well-developed offline program-ing capabilities." This view is echoed by othersin industry.

Insofar as commercial supply does develop,CIM may be provided through modular or all-at-once packages. Modular systems, which canbe expanded over time, could be provided byvarious types of firms, from those specializ-ing in one type of automation to those offer-ing a full range of systems. The success of thecommercial CIM packages expected to be Of=fered in the mid-1980's by Hitachi and by aNorwegian-West German joint venture mayprovide a measure of the potential for a trueCIM market.

A key uncertainty for a possible CIM mar-ket is the role of large, "supermarket" suppli-ers of programmable automation. The advan-tage that may accrue to suppliers of multipleforms of PA is hard to measure. In principle,such an advantage may exist because of whateconomists call "economies of scope"sav-ings in costs in the production of related prod-

--"Laura Conigliaro and Christine Chien, "Computer Inte-

grated Manufacturing," report of the April 1983 Prudential-Bache Securities Symposium on Computer-Integrated Manufac-turing, Prudential-Bache Securities, Aug. 2, 1983.

ucts through joint R&D, marketing, compo-nent manufacturing, and accumulation ofknow-how. The potential automation "super-markets"GE, IBM, Westinghouse, et al.have each expanded their automation produc-tion capabilities within the past few years. GE,for examplealready an established manufac-turer of industrial electronics (including pro-grammable controllers and local communica-tions networks)--- acquired Calrna for computergraphics and Intersil for integrated circuits;formed a joint venture with Structural Dy-namics Research Corp. to design and sell CAEprograming; developd and licensed robots forassembly, painting, welding, and other appli-cations; and- developed optoelectronics for ma-chine vision. GE has also established a man-ufacturing automation systems engineeringunit, and expanded its research capabilityJnelectronics, including VLSI technology. Bycontrast, Westinghouse acquired Unimationbut divested other production operations (forCNC, parts programing, and time-sharing) ina shift toward service business and away frommanufacturing.85

Size may not be essential for broad PA ca-pability. GCA, for example, is a relativelysmall producer of robots (and other equipment)that has established links with Japanese andU.S. firms to supply robotics hardware, visionsystems, and CAD units; its own efforts areconcentrated-on controls technology and soft-ware development.

Regardless of size, know-how will be partic-ularly important for a CIM market: In thewords of a GE representative, "The factoryof the future is a knowladge game, not a hard-ware game."88 Consequently, it is likely thatsystems houses and engineering consultingfirms will play a major role in providing CIM.Such firms have already played an importantrole in developing markets for individual typesof programmable automation. They are a con-duit for applications engineering and otherservices for tailoring available equipment to

"Bruce Vernyi. "Westinghouse Poised to Sell CNC. Parts Pro-gramming. Time-Share Lines,:' American Metal Market/Metal-working News, Aug. 8;1983.. "Jack Norman, "Impact of Automation Downplayed." Mil-waukee Journal. June 14, 1983.

31?

302 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

specific needs; Also; they are sometimes bet-ter able to obtain customer confidence than arevendors who haVe a stake in a given productline. Because hardware production is not es-sential for CIM "supply," some analysts be-lieve that nonmanufacturing organizationssuch as Battelle Memorial Institute, Booz-Allen & Hand hail, and A. T. Kearney may be-come important in the CIM market.87

Since PA is commonly construed by vendorsand users alike to be an answer to manufac-turing problems; companies who sell manytypes of automation and can integrate themmay be assumed to have a better notion ofwhat constitutes the right solution to a givenproduction problem, especially if they use PAthemselves; Because the firms that seek to bePA supermarkets have each accumulated sub-stantial experience with programmable auto-mation in their own production operations, theknow-how (and reputation) with which they en-ter the market might be a Critical advantage.On the other hand, a combination of consult-ants or service bureaus and smaller, special-ized produeerS of PA might achieve the sameend; The viability of the latter approach de-pends in part on Whether and when standardcomponentS and/or interfaces become available.

Computer vendors will likely play a majorrole in CIM supply; given the common element

""G.E. is Seeking to- Dominate Robot Field," Minneapolis,Finance & Commerce DailY, Oct. 13, 1983.

of computerization in PA products, and be-cause of these vendors' own experiences inadopting advanced automated systems. Com-puter vendors (and even semiconductor man-ufacturers) have demonstrated a growing in-terest in participating in PA supply generally.IBM, for example, recently reorganized its In-dustrial Automation, Graphics Systems Pro-grams, and Industry Applications systemunits into a Single unit to focus the manage-ment of its industrial automation business.88Moreover, the growth of computerizationwithout integrationthrough so-called islandsof automation and through growth in comput-erized management _systems (particularlythoSe aimed at nonproduction activities)maybenefit computer vendors by providing botha basis for future integration and a market forinterfaces and networking systems. Finally,the overall spread of computerization in officeas well as production activities may conveyan advantage to computer vendors; who arebecoming increasingly familiar to managers ofpotential customer firms.*

"'Mitchell York, "IBM Forme Unita for Distribution,_Indus-trial Systems," Computer Systems News, Nov. 21, 1983.

"Also, AT&T may become involved in this market. It haiplanned to join with Bailey Controls (division of Babcock &

Wilcox) "in linking communications technology with processcontrol systems, numerically controlled machines, mainframecomputers, engineering automation_systems and personal com-puters." "AT&T Unit, Bailey Set Linkup in Technology,"American Metal Market/Metalworng News, Nov. 21, 1983.

Themes and Conan SidrisOTA's evaluation of programmable automa:

tion industries reveals several broad themes.These are: 1) there has been a discrepancy be--

tween vendor and buyer views of needs andcapabilities; 2) systems planning and otherservices are key features of PA supply, whilemanufacturing itself plays a smaller role; 3)vendors are likely to package and/or distrib-ute hardware and software elements made byseveral firms; 4) both large and small firmshave played distinctive roles in the develop-

ment of PA markets; and 5)_government8 havehad a major influence on PA market devel-opment.

Vendors v. _Users. Deznite past and pre -dicted rapid growth rates, key barriers to fur-ther market growth have been: 1) the need forusers to learn how to adopt programmableautomation successfully; 2) vendor inability tofully meet user needs and wants; .and 3) theimmaturity of automation-tethnology, prin-

.Q

Ch. 7.Prograrnmable.Autornation lndustr es 303

cipally for system integration. Programmableautomation seems to require greater customersophistication than conventional automationif applications are to succeed. Vendors contin-ue to speak of the need for "missionary work;"for educating the prospective and actual buy-er. The discrepancy between vendor offeringsand user needs lies behind the slow start ofautomation industries; it is typical of newtechnology markets. What is unusual aboutthese markets, however; is the growing roleof user-producers: companies are developingproprietary equipment and systems and in-creasingly seeking to market them (or associ-ated know-how) externally.

Systems and Service.Automated equip-ment can be sold on a stand-alone basis, butis._increasingly sold in systems that are tai-lored to indiyidual needs through control tech -.nology and software modifications. Demandsthat users plan and adjust their organizationsto accord with new processes grow with thesize and complexity of the installation. Con-sequently, vendors undertake sophisticatedmarketing efforts and provide a variety ofservices to train users to plan for, operate, andmaintain their systems: Thus, PA vendors of-fer both services=the development of applica-tions, systems, and support functionsandgoods; vendors are not all manufacturingfirms; per se. This trend resembles conditionsin the computer industry generally. Indeed,there are some firms and divisions of firmsthat are strictly service-oriented; they providePA consulting and engineering services. Over-all, the proportion of manufacturing activityin this industry is declining as the role of serv-ices grows; the absolute level of manufactur-ing activity may also decline due to outsourc-ing practices.

Gross-fertilization.Licensing, outsourcing,mergers and acquisitions, limited-equity in-vestments, and joint ventures have been fre-quent means of entry into PA markets. Thesearrangements enable firms with dif rentstrengths to enter markets for comple prod-ucts quickly. They also provide a me s fordistant firms to enter remote markets. Thecross-fertilization trend for programmable au-

tomation is symptomatic of trends affecting.the overall information-processing and elec-tronics industries. These broad industrial caegories have seen a decline in levels of verticalintegration because new products are becom-ing more complex; product change is acceler-ating, international competition is strengthen-ing, and product development costs are rising.

Many cooperative ventures link firms fromdifferent countries. In particular, substantialnumbers of U.S. firms license or buy Japanesehardware and European software; Japanesefirms have licensed U.S. software recently, asthey earlier did hardware. Collaboration facil-itates entry into foreign markets; especiallyin the case of Japan; local firms provide remoteones with distribution and support networks.Cooperative ventures have thus hastened theinternational diffusion of PA technology andthe growth of global markets.

The long-term implications of cross-fertili-zation are unclear. They depend on whetherfirms can and do acquire the strengths of theirpartners and therefore become new, independ-ent competitors. Because of this possibility,some pessimists characterize cooperative ven-tures as "Trojan Horses" that may harm do-mestic firms in the long run.

Firm Size.Because large and small firmsoffer both .advantages and disadvantages inthe PA market, it is hard to predict future ten-dencies for industrial structure. Typically, in-dustries grow as small, innovative firms ex-pand or are acquired; remaining small firmsserve specialized niches. This pattern can beseen with programmable automation, but alarger role for small firms is also possible. Thisis in part because vertical integration is rela-tively uncommon. Small firms may continueto find opportunities as service bureaus or con-sultants. Also, the proliferation of software.packages and limited-function, low-cost equip-ment and systems may eontinue to provide arole-for small firms in PA supply.

The emergence of standards for componentsand/or interfaces may also help smaller ven-dors, even if standards develop de facto as theproduct designs of larger; dominant manufac-

313

304 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

turers. This has been thy, .ttern in the com-puter industry. By contrast, large firms mayoffer more experience with applications andmay be relatively well-suited to assemblinglarge, complex systems.

Government Role.Gov ernments haveplayed key roles in the development of U.S.and foreign markets for PA. As described inchapter 9, differences in government roles re-

flect differences in national context (labor mar-ket conditions, industrial composition, tech-nology strengths, etc.). The U.S. Governmentrole has been largely limited to support for mil-itary programs aimed at meeting defense pro-curement needs. Other governments appear tohave provided more support for commercialPA development and use, although the effec-tiveness of such support is hard to appraise.

Chapter 8

Research an Development

Contents

Summary 307

Introduction 308

Ftiridii* and Performers of R&D in Programmable Automation 309Ove6,ieVy 309Federally Funded R&D Efforts 314Industry-Funded R&D 326Other Sources of Funding for R&D 330

International Comparisons in R&D 330

TablesFurth. Page

63: Major Components of Federal Funding for R&D 31164: R&D in Selected_AgeneieS 31165: Funding for the DOD Manufacturing TechnOlogy.Program 31566: Summary: DOD R&D in Programmable Automation,

Fiscal Year 1_984 31867. Automation Research; National Bureau of Standards 32068. Selected NSF Programs Which Fund Automation-Related Research 323bt-). NASA AutomationResearch 32570. Summary: Federal Civilian Agency R&D in Programmable

Automation, Fiscal Year 1984 32671. Company R&D Expenditures as a Proportion of Sales: by InduStry 327

,72. Esilmated R&D Expenditures in PA Industries; 1983 327

FiguresFigure No. Page

33. The National R&D Effeet 309:34. National Expenditures for R&D by Source 31035: National Expenditures for Performance of R&D as a

Percent of Gross National PrOdiitt by Country 31236. Estimated Ratio of Civilian R&D Expenditures to

Gross National Product for Selected Countries 31237. The Range of Programmable Automation Research and Development 31338. Patent Activity by Country Comparison 331

Chapter 8

Research and Development

SurhmaryA wide variety of research and development

(R&D) efforts, ranging from very basic, long-term research to market-oriented, short-termproduct development, are applicable to pro-grammable automation (PA). The principalfields which contribute to such R&D are com-puter science; electrical, mechanical, indus-trial, and manufacturing en-gineering; andmetallurgy.

Both government and industry are majorfunders of R&D in automation technologies.The Federal Gevernment budgeted approxi-mately $80-million of work in this area in fiscalyear 1984. This work is tmdertaken in indus-try, university, and government laboratories.

The bulk of Federal funding for automationR&D (roughly $64 million) comes from-the De-partment of Defense (DOD), primarily throughits Manufacturing Technology (ManTech) Pro=gram. This work is aimed at facilitating tech-nologies that would improve defense produc-tion. Other agencies in DOD fund work withpotential applications for both defense man-ufacturing and the battlefield. While DOD'sfunding of automation technology R&D hashad some benefits for civilian manufacturing;ite programs are not aimed at technologicaldevelopments that would have wide applica-tions outside of defense needs. In addition, thetechnologies developed through DOD tend tobe some of the most complex, useful largelyin the advanced aerospace and electronics in-dustries.

Civilian agency programs in automationR&D are relatively small. The National Aer-onautics and Space Administration (NASA)funds work primarily in robotics-rehtted toolsfor use in space, much of which, like DOD's

programs, is at the very sophisticated end ofthe technology spectrum and has limited com-mercial spinoffs. The National Science Foun-

- dation (NSF) funds a wide range of more basicwork related to programmable automation, aswell as helping to establish centers for univer-sity-industry cooperation. The ,NatiOnal Bu-reau of Standards' (NES) laboratory is theGovernment's primary in-louse performer ofR&D for manufacturing. Their work includesa large -scale_ test arena _for computer -rate-grated manufacturing (CIM) techniques andinterface standardS, known -as the AutomatedManufacturing Research Facility (AMRF).

Industry _funding for R&D in this area,though hard to gauge precisely, seem to beheathy and escalating rapidly, es peilr. all asthe market for programmable automation de-vices becomes more competitive. The percep-tion among technologic researchers seems tobe that industry -is "where the action is" forautomation R&D. Industry spending in themachine tool, CAD, and robotics industriesalone amounted to approximately $250 millionto $400 million in 1983. There is alb° evidenceof a proliferation of industry-university coop-erative research.

Foreign industries and cooperative industry-government laboratories are also pursuingvery active PA research programs. Japan,WeSt Germany, and Swededand to a lesserextent the United Kingdom and Francehavesignificant research efforts in this area Thetraditional U.S. lead in development of thesetechnologies has been eroded, although theUnited States is still a strong leader in manytechnical areas. However, Japan has beenmore active than either the United States orWestern Europe in application of the technologies.

323.-

307

308 Computerized Manufacturing AutomatiOn: Employment, Edocation; and the Workplace

IntroductiOnThe aim of this chapter is to assess the con-

text for R&D in programmable_ automation.The chapter begins with general backgroundon R&D and its funding,_and examines in dW-tail Federal ftu2ding of R&D in programmableautomation. Industry R&D efforts are out-lined, and a final section brings forth some ofthe highlights in international comparisons inR&D.*

"R&D" is often used as a catch-all term fora wide variety of activities which _range fromthe most esoteric science (far at the "R" endof the range) to the most down-tearth prod-uct development efforts (pure "D"). And be-cause programmable automation draws onsuch a wide variety of science and engineer-ing fieldscomputer science; manufacturing,electrical; mechanical, and industrial engineer-ing; and metallurgy, to name just the primaryonesit can be difficult to isolate those effortswhich should be considered relevant.

NSF offers the following definitions:In basic research the objective of thesponsor is to gain fuller knowledge orunderstanding of the fundamental as-pects of phenomena and of observablefacts without having specific applicationstoward processes or products in mind.In applied research the objective of thesponsor is to gain knowledge or tmder-standing necessary for determining themeans by which a recognized and specificneed may be met.Development is systematic use of theknowledg'e or understanding gained fromresearch, directed toward the productionof useful materials, devices, systems, ormethods, including design and develop-ment of prototypes and processes. It ex-

*Chapter 9 covers foreign R&D mechanisms md hmtitstions.The content of foreign R&D in automation will lie outlined atthe end of this chapter.

32,4

cludes quality control, routine producttesting, and production.'

Classification of individual R&D efforts intosuch categories is often not completely straight-forward, and involves a great deal of judg-

" merit. Moreover, this distinction has becomeincreasingly less clear-cut in recent decades.Science and technology have become harderto differentiate, and universities have more ac-tively sought industrial funding. R&D effortsat all three levelsthose considered basic re-search, applied research; and developmentare important for programmable automation.

As figure 33 indicates, the Federal Govern-ment and industry are the two dominant con-tributors_ to R&D spending in the UnitedStates. Universities, State and local govern-xnents, and other nonprofit institutions makea small addition of their own funds. In 1983;out of a total R&D pool of $86.5 billion; theFederal Government spent almost $40 billion;or 46 percent. Industry contributed $44.3 bil-lion, or 51 percent. NSF estimates that totalR&D funding will be $97 billion for 1984. In-dustry overtook the Government in spendingfor R&D in 1980; according to NSF data (seefig 34). While the Federal Government'espending for R&D has remained relatively con-stant in 1972 dollars, industry's share grewsubstantially in real dollars in the 1970's andearly 1980's.

Industry is also the dominant peHormer ofR&D, receiving 74 gercent'of the total of $86.5billion in 1983. Universities received 9 percentof those funds, and Federal agencies or R&Dcenters 14 percent.

Within the Federal Government, tables 63and 64 show that defense-related R&D is thesingle largest and fastest growing component

National Science Foundation, Federal Funds for Researchend Development: Fiscal Years 1981. 1982, and 1983 (Wash-ingtbn, D.C.: National Science Foundation; 1982), p. 1.

Ch. 8.Research and Development 309

Figura 33.The National R&D EffortExpenditures for R&D = $97 billion, 1984 (est.)

2% 10/o

Bysource

Federal Government Industry and collegesnoOthernonprofit

institutions

I 11%1 74% goit;ita

Research

Basic Applied DevelopmentFFRDCs

SOURCE: National Science Foundation, preliminary figures from NatIOnN Retterns of Science and Technology Resources, 1987, In pram

of Federal R&D funding. Nondefense R&Dspending by the Federal Government has de-dined in real terms under the Reagan adniin-

- istration, primarily due to dramatic reductionin nondefense applied research, development;and demonstration activities. Basic researchhas been relatively healthy, albeit with a fewshifts in priorities. Defense-related R&D isestimated at $30.2 billion in 1984, accountingfor 66 percent of Federal spending for R&D ;2

'W. C. Roseman, "U.S. Civilian and Defense Research andDevelopment Ptindhig: Some Trends raid CompmUoria WithSeecr.eol IncAustrWireti Nadolui,' Ccingreetifetal Reeiniith See-ice, Report No 83-183, Aug. 29, 1983; and American Associa-tion for the Advancement of Science, AAAS Report IX:Research & Development; FY 1985 (Washington; D.C.: fiuVAS,-1984):

The United States has historically spent farmore than its allies on R&D. However, figure35 shows that foreign expeillt&Dhave grown faster than those in the UnitedStates. In addition, both Japan_ and West Ger-many have exceeded the United States in non.defense R&D as a percentage of gross nationalproduct (GNP) (see fig. 36).

'Ibid.

Funding and Pertormers of R&Din Programmable Automation

Overview

For purposes of this study, R&D in pro-grammable automation is work which is cen-trally concerned with ore or more of the tech-nologies identified in table 5 in chapter 3.Industry and the Federal Government are theprimary sources of funding for such work in

the United States, although universities andState governments have made small contri-butions

Figure 37 is a roug i map of the performersof R&D related to programmable automation.The Federal dovenunent's interest in suchwork comes from several agencies, each with

323

1310 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

$46

44

42

40

38

36

34

32

30

_____ 28

T 26-13

4-2-6

220

20ct)

18

16

14

12

10

Figure 34.National Expenditures for R&D by Source

Current dollars

8

6 -4 ---- Universities NPId

and collegesc2 -

1960 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 83

Year

$46

44

42

40

38

36

34

32

30

28

26

24

22

20

18

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

Constant 1972 dollaisa

Universitiesand collegesc NPId2-

1960 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 83

Year

aGNp implicit price deflators used to convert current dollars to constant 1972 dollars°Data are not available on industry resources for research in the psychological and social sciencescIncludes State and local government sourcesdOther nonprofit institutions (--

SOURCE: National Science Foundation, Science Indicators-1982 (Washinitton, D.C.: National Science Board, 1983).

3

Ch. 8.- Research and Development 311

Table 63. -Major Components of Federal Funding for R&D' (budget authority in tiallaria)

Fiscal year 1967actual

Fiscal year 1972actual

Fiscal year 1982actual

Fiscal year 1983actual

Fiscal year 1984estimate

Fiscal year 1985budget

Current dollars:Defense° $8.8 $9.2 $22.9 $25.6 $30.2 $37.9Non.Defense` 8.3 7.0 15.8 14.4 15.7 164

---:---3.6 1.7 2.3Space° 4.7 2.7 1.9

Health° 1.3 2.0 4.1 4.5 5.1 5.2Energy' 0.6 0.6 3.5 2.9 2.8 2.7General science° 0.5 0.7 1.5 1.6 1.9 2.2All other 12_--- __1.9 3.1 3.7 4.0 4.0

$17.1 $38.7 $40.0 $45.9 $54.3Total R&D $17.1

Constant fiscal year 1972 dollars:Defense° $12.4 $9.2 $9.8 $10.4 $11.9 $14.2NonDefense° $11.7 $72 _S2.2- $6.4 $6.6 $6.6

Space° 6.6- 2.7 1.7 0.8 0.8 0.9Health° 1.8 2.0 19 2.0 2.2 2.1Energy' .. . . . .......... . 0.8 0.6 1 6 1.3 1.2 1.1General science° 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.8_ 0.9All other 1.7 1.9 1.4 1.6 1.7" 1 6

Total R&D $24.0 $171 $17e $16.8 $18.5 $20.8°Includes conduct of R&D and R&D facilities.°Includes DOD_And defense activities in DOE.°Includes all R&D in defense.°Reflects AAAS' estimates for NASA less space application's and aeronautical research.°For fiscal years 1982.1985, includes health research in HHS. VA, Education,.anCI EPA. Fiscal year 1967 and 1972 based on OMB data for health research in all Federal;agencies. -

-Includes NRC, EPA energy research, and DOE less defenao aCiivitieS And worm tolenee,°includes NSF and DOE general science.

SOURCE: American Association for the Advancement of Science, AAAS Report IX: Research R Development, FY 1985 (Washington, DO: AAAS, 1984). AAASestimatesbased on data from-OMB-and agency budget justifications. Conversion to constant FY 1972 dollars by AAAS based on OMB deflators.

Table 641-112k1) In Selected Agencies' (budget ihithbritif lh

Fiscal year 1983actual

Fiscal w3ar 1984estimated

Fiscal year 1985budges_

(proposed)

__ Percent chAngeFiscal year 1984.85 Fiscal year 1984.85_Cur amt_clialtart constant dollars

DOD $23,673 $27,876 $35,336 +26:8% +20.9%DOE-defense 1,975 _2,286 2,522 +10.3% +5.3%

(Total defense) (25,648) (30,162) (37,858) (+253%) (+19.8%)DOE-general science 568 639 745 +16.5% +1t3%DOE-energy 2,622 2,610 2.499 -4.3% -8.5%NASA 2,735 2,971 3,466 +16.7% -1-11.4%NSF 1,059 1,247 1,427 + 14.4% +9.2%NIH . . - 3,814 4,264 4,356 +2.2% -2A%Other HHS 557 613 597 -2.7% -7:0%USDA 885 923 926 +0:4% -4.1%EPA 234 248 280 +12.7% +7.6%Education, 102 111 107 -3.3% -7.5%NOAH 213 240 167 -30.4% -33.5%NBS 94 95 103 +8.2% +3.5%USGS ........... 149 162 148 -8,6% -12.7%Bureau of Mines 97 _87 69 -21.0% -24.5%All other 1,265 1,533 1,555 +1 5% -3.0%

(Total nondefense) 44,393) (15,743) (16,444) (+4.4%) (-0:3%)Total _$40)342 $45,905 $54,301 +18.3% +12,7%

alncludes conduct of R&D and R&D facilities.

SOURCE: American Association for the Advancement of Science, AAAS Repart_IXLReteattri d DevelOpment, FY 1985 (Washington, D,C.: AAAS, 1984), using "OMBData for Special Analysis K," as revised, and agency budget justifications.

25-452 0 - 84 - 21 Qli 3

312 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Worn

Figure 35.-National EVOnditures for Performanceof R&D as a Percent of Gross National Product by

Country

3.8

3.6

3.4

3.2

3.0

2.8 United2.6 Kingdom

2.4

2

2.0

1 8

1.6

UnitedStates

A A_. A /

- - France1.4

Japan1.2

1.0

.8

.6

.4

.2 -0 l I III-I-11961 63 65 67 69 71 73 75

Year

aCrosS expenditures for performance of R&D Including associated capital expend- .

iturea, except for the United States where total capital expenditure data are notavailable. Estimates for the period 1972-80 show that their inclusion would havean impact of less than one-tenth of 1 percent for each year.

77 79 81 83

NOTE: The lateat data may be preliminary or estimated.

SOURCE: NatiOnW_Selende_ FOUndatio Science Indicators-196ti(washIngton;D.C.: National Science Board, 1983).

different approaches and goals._ DOD fundsvery substantial Etrctounts of R&D in automa-tion technology-primarily in industry labs-both to save the Government money on itspurchases of manufactursd goods, and todevelop technolotOes which may have appli-cations for manufacturing or in battlefieldsituations. NBS, under the auspices of the De-partment of Commerce, pursues automationresearch because of the standards and meas-urement issues involved, and as a result of alongstanding mandate to investigate variousaspects of computer technology. NASA looksto automation technologies to help plan and

Figure 38.-EstimExpenditures to_C

Seiec2.6

2.5

2.4

2.3

2.2

2.1

2.0

1.9

1.8

1.7

1.6

1.5

1.4

1.3

1.2

1.1

1.0

0.9

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

aNalionat expenditures excludinc

SOURCE: National Science Founb.C.: National Sclenct

conduct space misrange of automatuniversities, as paxsupport work in scencourage technolAnd finally, an asfare exploring robmanufacturing art]nance in nuclear

Oh: 3. Research and Lloyd-Omen? 313

rs

Figure 37.The Range of Programmable Automation Research and Development

UnittertitteOIndustry Other

a

,77,1,-,..2.7.75"

Key. 1. ONR = Office of Naval Research.DARPA = Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency.

3 IMIP Industpal_Mo_dernization_Incentive Program$ IPAD = Integiated Program for AerospaceVehicle Design.S MCC = -Microelectronics 8 Computer Corp.

SRC = Semiconduc/or Research Corp.6 CAMI = Computer Aided ManufacturingInternational.

SOURCE Office of Technology Assessment.

Cr

329

314 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

AS the second column of figure 37 displays,the major players in R&D in industry arethose who make automation technology andthose who use it, categories which have mergedto some extent (see ch. 7). In addition; coop-erative interindustry research efforts play asmall, though perhaps increasing; role. As willbe discussed below,: industry spending onautomation R&D is hard to gauge accuratelybecause some_privately held firms do not di-vulge the information; other; larger companiesdo not disaggregate the portion of their R&Dbudget spent for programmable automation.

Universities (column 3) pursue automationresearch EliFough a handful of traditional de-partments, and in some cases through new au-tomation research labs and/or cooperative ef-forts with industry. They are still the centersof basic research, although they are increas-ingly working on applied research and evende-velopment topics.

several other independent laborato-rieS leolumn 4) have played key roles in auto-!nation R&D, and one association of variousindustry, government, and foreign interests.Computer Aided Manufacturing:International'(CAM:I)--funds research projects at univer-sity and industry labs; and in some casesserves as a forum for technology transfer be-tween companies or from universities to in-dustry.

The remainder of this section describes inmore detail the particular programs and levelsOf fundine undertaken by the primary spon-sors of pnigrarnmable automation R&Dgov-eminent and industry.

Federally Funded R&D EffortsThe Department of Defense

Manufacturing Technology.The bulk ofDOD's automation technology research is con-ducted under its Manufacturing Technology,(ManTech) Program, which iS funded at $200million in fiscal year 1984. The Army, Navy,and Air Force's allocations within ManTechhave been somewhat unstable over the past

few years,* although DOD plans a substan=tial increase in all ManTech funding within thenext few years (see table 65). The goal of theprogram is to develop and apply pro5ductivity-enhancing manufacturing technologies, pri-marily to military contractors. ManTech alsoattempts to actively transfer manufacturingtechnologies to industries not necessarily in-volved in !unitary work.**

Although the Pentagon has been involvedin manufacturing technology for several dec-ades, the current ManTech program essential-ly began in 1960: It has helped develop andapply several historically significant technol-ogies, including numerically controlled ma-chine tools and the APT language for thosetools, as well as calculators using integratedcircuits.

ManTech projects aim for a grey area be-tween applied research; development, and ap-plication. Although the program purports notto "develop" technology, it nonetheless con-tributes to that process. The standards of theprogram require that the projects are techni-cally feasible, eenerically applicable, and havea level of cost and risk such that private in-dustry cannot or Will not fund the work.

ManTech contracts with industry to (in itsterms) "procure" a manufacturing process

*In particular, the Army's ,'ifanTech program aufferikl a sub-stantiaI cut in 1983 funds when the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense decided that Army ManTech did not be-long in the procurement budget, bat rather in R&D. Thesubcommittee cut the entire amount ($110 millioro requestedin the procurement category, but later restored $50 million inR&D funds. Pentagon officials argue that although ManTechdoes look like R&D in some respects, it is better for the pro-gram CO be administered `n procurement, where managers aremore likely to be familiar With manufacturing. As of early 1984,the subcommittee had persuaded DOD to put the bulk ofManTech Funding in R&D. There is some worry that R&D fund=mg maybe more =stable; however. (Lloyd Lehn, ManTech Pro-gram Offiter, The Penttgon, personal_commusications.)

**The General Accounting Office (GAO) hafwriUtized theManTech prograrn for having inadequate documentation of theeffectiveness of its technology transfer efforts ("Manufactur-ing Technology--A Cost Reduction Tool at the Department ofDefense That Needs Sharpeuuig;'! September 1979). As thePentagon concedes, ManTeth staff often do not know to whatextent industries pick up technologies devWopiikl under the pro-gram. GAO plans to publish an update of that report in thespriag of 1984.

j

Ch. 8.Research and Development 315

Table 65.-=FOnding for the DOD Manufacturing Technology Program (In MIIII-ohe)

Fiscal year1980 4 -981 1982 1983 1984 1985 (preliminary)

Army 68 76 95 41 86 81Navy 14 12 29 32 57 68Air Force 56 66 86 59 57 62Total 138 154 210 200 211

aAs of January 1984.

SOURCE:Department of Defense.

that enhances pal-titular DOD manufacturingapplications. FOr example, the Air Force Man-Tech staff might decide that soldering of par-ticular printed circuit boards could be auto-mated if someone would apply existing polderingand computer control technologies and buildan interface between the computer and solder-ing machines. The Air Forte would requestcompetitive bids to do this Work, and wouldthen establish a contract and a Stheddle witha particular firm. (ManTech did, in fact; fundthe automation of a wave soldering machinefor printed circuit boards used in several weap-ons systems. The new process is claimed tosave $1.1 million per year; ManTech's invest-ment was $450;000.)4

. Of $200 million in fiscal year 1984 fundingfor ManTech, $56 million is concerned withcomputer-aided manufacturing. Othertetliiii-cal areas funded by ManTech include electron-ics, inspection and test techniques, productionof metal and nonmetalparts, and ammunitionProdtiction. Pentagon directors of the programestimate that the vast majority of ManTechinn& are spent for R &D -in private-100 percent -of Air Force ManTech funds, 75percent Of Navy funds; and 50 percent -of theArmy'S. Roughly 400 to 500 projects are ac-tive at a tiine, covering an extraordinary,rangeof subjects from rocket nozzle improvementsto ambitious effort§ to integrate program-mable automation devices.

The latter are the most relevant to thisstudy. The 'Air Force began its IntegratedComputer- Aided Mantzfacturing (ICAM) pro-gtait in 1978. It is the largest single expendi-

i

'L. Allen and L. L, Lehn, Technology Area IN:web-pt.:ionof the Manufacturing Tedmology Program, June 30, 1983 (aPentagon publication).

ture in ManTech, funded at $18 million hi1983. It is also one of the most prominent andbroad-baeed efforts inprogammable automa-tion systems R &D -ICAM has developed "ar=chitectures" for the structure and control ofautomated manufacturing, and it has fundeda variety of work on the foundationS of CIM.ICAM is being phased out as a separatelybudgeted line item in the Air Force ManTechprogram, though the_program's directors intend to continue work in integrated man_ ufac;taring:

The Army's ManTech program has similarprojett clearly related to programmable auto-mation: Electronics Computer=Aided Manu-facturing (ECAM). It is similar in concept toICAM although newer and much lest ambi-tious in scope. It aims to develop CAM tech=niques for electronics, specifically for the smallbatch sizes of electronic devices which areoften needed in a military environment.

The Navy has been slower to pursue auto-mated manufacturing technologieS, in partcause the immense product size and oftencustom-production environment in shipbuild=ing operations. However, there has been sub=stantial progress in recent years, particularlyin robotic welding in shipbuilding.°

The Army, Navy, and Air Force ManTechprograms are coordinated by a Manufactur-ing Technology Advisory Grotip (MTAG),which has representatives from each of theServices, the Pentagon, other Government

'See, An Assessmmt_of M-aritime Trade And Technology(WveltieirLon; D.C.: U.S. Congress, Office of Technolimy Assess-ment, Octblier 1983). and R. Brooks, "Navy ManTech to FocusMore on Shipbuilding," American Metal Market/MetWwoth-ing News, Mar. 12, 1984.

331

316 Computerized Manufacturing AbldinaticM: EMployment; Education, and the Workplace

agencies, and defenae-related industries.MTAG and its subcommittees suggest areasfor ManTech projectS, help avoid duplicationof effort, and conduct conferences and deha-onstrations which help transfer ManTech-de-veloped techhologies to industry. In addition,MTAG serves as an inforinal coordinating andinformationgathering body for automationR&D in other Government agencies and indus-try. Beyond its function for DOD, it is the onlyestablished forum in which key representa-tivea from defense-related industry and Gov-ernment agencies meet regularly to discuss au-tomation R&D. As such, it facilitates some ofthe informal networking and-development ofconsortia that occurs among Government andindustry programmable automation experts.Approximately 200 representatives serve onMTAG and its subcommittees, roughly 80 per-cent from DOD and the military services, and10 percent each from other Government agen-cies and industry.

Until fiscal year 1982, DOD conducted aprogram within Man Tech which helped man-ufacturers pay for implementing newmanufac-turing technologies, inclUding many of thosedeveloped in Man Tech projects. ThiS Thchnol-ogy Modernization (Tech'Mod) programusedprimarily by the Air Forcehas now been re-labeled the Industrial Modernization Incen-tives Program (IMIP), and separated fromMan Tech funding. (The removal of TechModfrom Man Tech was one of the reasons for thedip in Man Tech funding in fiscal year 1983,along with disagreements described in foot-note, p. 314). Some in industry have arguedthat many of the technologies explored inMan Tech are rather esoteric, while those in-volved in the Tech Mod or IMIP efforts seemto be more practical.

IMIP is used to supplement cost-reimburs-able contractsprocurement agreements withno fixed dollar amount; the firm bills DOD forits materials and Services. Such contracts areused for most major procurements at DOD toinsulate industry from the unpredictability ofbuilding massive weapons systems. UnderIMIP, DOD helps pay for installing new man=ufacturing technology because it expects to

reap the benefits downstream in lower reim-bursable costs. Although_ all three serviceshave a mandate to use IMIP, the Air Forcecontinues to be the primary user of the pro-gram, with $83 million budgeted in 1984.° .

Other DOD Programs. =Two other agencieswithin DOD fund longer term, more basic_re-search efforts related to automation technolo-gies. The Defense Advanced Research ProjectsAgency (DARPA) has a program in IntelligentTask Automation (ITA), which funds roboticsresearch with both manufacturing Sand mili-tary (i.e., maintenance, logistics, and weapons)uses in mind. Three major initiatives are underway:7

DARPA and the Air Force materials labare jointly funding a "Systems Integra-tion and Demonstration" project, inwhich two competing teams of contrac-tors are performing applied R&D thatmay "lead to quantum jumps" in roboticstechnology. One team, headed by Honey-well, is attempting to develop a coordi-nated dual-arm roboti.e.,-not two robotsoperating in sequence, as is already foundin industry, but dual arms that can worktogether much like human arms. Anotherteam, headed by Martin Marietta, isworking on aprogrammable assembly rd.=bot which would make extensive use ofsensors, enabling it to cope with relativelydisordered manufacturing situations suchas bins of parts. These projects are 29-month efforts funded at $1.6 million (to-tal) in 1984. DARPA aims to evaluate theresearch in early 1985 and to continuemore intensive work with one of the twoteams.DARPA budgeted $1.3 million in 1984 forwork in sensory control. This includeswork on 3=dimensional vision sensing atCarnegie- Mellon University, and ultrason-ic imaging at Rockwell International. Thelatter is intended primarily for nonman-ufacturing military needs. For example,

D. Reeves, staffemeneer, IMIP Program, The Pe-ntAvon, per-sonM communication, Feb. 1O, 1984:'

'W. Isler, ITA program officer, DARPA, interview, Sept. 2,1983.

33e

Ch. 8.Research and Development 317

vision systems are of little use in smoke;fog, or darkness on a battlefield; but asound-based system could construct im-ages based on the way objects reflectsound waves. A third project in this_cat-egory involves tactile sensing at CaseWesternWestern Reserve University, where re-searchers hope to combine conventionaltouch sensors with what they call a hap-tic sensor, which would send fedback tothe robot controller about the state of"elbow" and "shoulder" joints.Finally, $600,000 is budgeted in 1984 forwork in advanced mechanical design of ro=bots. This primarily involves developinglightweight, flexible structures (most like-ly from composite fiber materials), as wellas control systems and sensors whichwould allow controllers to direct the mo-tion of such arms without backlash, andestablish the position of flexible armsunder various loads.

Aside from these projects hi the ITA pro=grant DARPA has been the dominant hinderof general artificial intelligence (AI) research,and has proposed an extensive new programcalled "Strategic Computing" for R&D in Aland advanded computer architectures. Con-gress has appropriated $50 million for the pro-gram in fiscal year 1984, and DARPA plansto spend $600 million total between 1984 and1988. The program aims for advanced applica-tions of Al techniques (weapons systems inparticular) and also includes some develop-ment of "supercomputers," machines like theCRAY and CDC Cyber which can process morethan 100 million instructions per_ second.Though this work is not aimed specifically atmanufacturing, it may ultimately (in futuredecades) have some applicability for all coin;puterized systems.

There may be some uses for supercomputersin manufacturing, although currently onlyCAD and, to some extent, machine vision,need substantially more processing power.Other automation systems may, as their so-phistication increases, also require more com-puter power, but the supercomputer is notlikely to be the answer for many of these prob=

,

lems because of its multimillion-dollar pricetag and because hierarchical organization offactory computer systems is more likely thanreliance on one huge machine. Supercomputerscurrently cost roughly $5 million to $15

The second DOD agency fundingautoma-tion research is the Office of Naval Research(ONR), whose manufacturing science programhas two components:8

ONR has awarded grants to Stanford,North Carolina State, Purdue, and theUniversity of Maryland (totaling roughly$1.2 million per year) for work in precisionengineering. These projects respond to skincreasing need for precision in machin-ing and high - quality surfaces especiallyfor weapons_ systems and optical instru-mentation. There are also a few nomnili-tary applications, such as manufacturingof computer disk drives. In general, thisresearch aims to develop machine toolsand other devices which can position andshape part surfaces within a tolerance ofless than one ten-thousandth of an inch.Four other research efforts are under way,at a total funding level of 4pproximately$600;000 per year, iv a variety of topics,including 3-±rrtensional vision, adaptivecontrol of grinding and polishing tools,and automated process planning.

ONR also supports:A "special focus program in robotics,"spending about $1 million per year totalon a variety of topics, and emphasizing"intelligent robot" projects- similar toDARPA's.Feasibility studies and plans for flexiblemanufacturing systems, at $800,000 peryear.Mini-machine interaction research, atroughly $500,000 per year. This work,aimed at optimizing computer systems'power and ease of use for humans, in-cludes use of videodisks and multimediapresentations, advanced ,color graphics,.

°E. Glauberson and A. Meyerowitz, ONR; interview, Aug-. 10;1983.

333

318 Computerized Manute CtUring Automation: Employment; Education, and the Workplace

and improvements in ease of use for CADgeometric modeling systems.General AI research, at about $2.5 mil-lion per year.

The Navy has also begun a robotics programat its Naval Surface Weapons Center in Mary-land. That program, budgeted at approximate-ly $4 million per year, is aimed at robotics usesfor the military, such as maintenance, testingand support of Navy equipment.*

Summary and Conclusions: DOD. Table 66summarizes DOD funding of programmableautomation R&D. It is clear that DOD sup-ports a substantial amount of R&D efforts re-lated to programmableautomation. WhileDOD'S involvement in this area has had sig-nificant spinoffs and has led industry to pur-sue certain aspects of automation, it would bemisleading to conclude, that DOD's involve=ment in this area constitutes a focal point inthe Federal Government for generic R&D inautomation technologies.

First, DOD's projects are mission-orientedin ways that limit their applicability to non-defense manufacturing. The vast majority of

Tom Mcfight, Naval Siitfrice-Wepons -Center;-personalcommunication, Feb: 1.0; 1984:

ManTech projects, for example, are designedto produce a very specific technology to im-prove a particular defense manufacturing proc-ess. Many of these manufacturing applica-tions, especially those involving ammunition,weapons, or armored vehicles, are unique toDOD. Some ManTech- developed technologiescan be modified for commercial use, althoughthereis some question about the effectivenessof DOD's attempts to promote such technol-ogy transfer.9

Likewise, most of DOD'smore basic work,,such as that funded by DARPA and ONR, isoriented toward military applications. ADARPA official explained, `We =don't have amandate to be pushing manufacturing . . . Youdon't haveto be a wild-eyed Strangelove to seethe Possibilities [for use of robots in battlefieldsupport]." In many cases there are common-alities between military and commercial appli-cations of automation technologies: A robotthat could navigate a battlefield could alsomake its way through a cluttered factory; amachine tool that can make very precise partsfor weapons Systems can also make very pre-ciao parts for computer disk drives; Neverthe-less, R&D oriented toward military applica-

'General Accounting Office report, op. cit.

Table 66.Summary: DOD R&D in Programmable Automation, Fiscal Year 1984(in millions)

ManufaCturing Technology (ManTech):Army, Navy, and Air Force including $20 million for Air Force's ICAM

program $56.0a

Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA):Intelligent Task Automation Program:

Systems integration and demonstration 1.6

Sensory control . 1.3Advanced mechanical design 0.6DARPA total 3.5

Office of Naval Reseamn (ONR):Manufacturing Science Program:

Precision engineering 1.2

Other topics 0.6Special focus program in robotics 1.0

Man-machine interaction 0.5

Flexible manufacturing systems 0.8ONR total 4.1

DOD total $61 6

allote: The total ManTech budget for fiscal year 1984 is approximately $200 million. Of that total, approximately $58 million

funded work In PA.SOURCE: Department of Defense, Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, Offide of Naval Research.

Ch 8:7Research and Development 319

tions has a much higher payback for defensethan for nondefense commercial applications.Transfer of computer-related technologiesfrom pop to civilian applications is increas-ingly the exception rather than the rule.

Fine ily, there is a set of DOD-sponsored ac-tivities, such as ICAM and ECAM, which areneither directed toward a very specific defensemanufacturing process, nor_ exclusively ori-ented toward military applications. Thesehave helped develop substantial automationtechniques of Wily generic applicability. How-ever, these programs, like most of the Man-Tech, DARPA, and ONR projects, tend toapply to, and be useful for, only the mostsophisticated of current manufacturers. In amanufacturing sector which has only a smallfraction of its machine tools equipped withnumerical control, ICAM's hierarchical archi-tecture for an integrated, automated factorymay seem to some like science-fiction. More-over; because of DOD's close relationshipwith certain supplier firms, technologies de-veloped under programs like ManTmh tend tobe transferred to the sophisticated aerospaceand electronics industries.

elkIn smmnary, DOD's R&D in programmable

automation serves several distinct purposes.It purports to save the Government a substan-tial amount of money in procurement funds;it makes_ advances in certain technologiesavailable for commercial exploitation, primari-ly for high -earl users; and it advances the stateof automata. technology for many militarypurposes, with some side benefits for nonmil-itary industry. DOD has had a significant im-pact on the directions for automation R&D incivilian industry, and ManTech's MTAGgroup also serves as a coordination and infor-mation-clissemination forum for industry andGovernment. However, DOD's involvement inthis area is not, nor is it intended to be, ageneral-purpose avenue for widely applicableR&D in programmable automation.

Civilian Agency ProgramsThree civilian agencies have substantial re-

search interests related to automationogies: NBS,'NSF, and NASA.

National Bureau of Standards; Under theauspices of the Department of Commerce;NBS Center for Manufacturing Engineeringconducts a considerable amount of automa-tion-related research. As table 67 indicates,NBS' work in automation has growr.v-rapidly--over the past few years, to a $7.55 million pro-gramin 1984. The budgetfor automation research is a small part of NBS' total budget of6120 million, and it is alsti small comparedWith DOD'S budget for automation efforts.NBS has two labs, one in Maryland and an-other_in Colors o,_ working on issues rangingfrom fire and construction ctides to evalnatingcomputer systems for Federal purchase.

NBS' mandate for involvement in program-mable intdination R&D is tlifeefOld. First, itis intenaed to be a catalyst for standar. -:=de-velopment activities in indifstry, Star aidsfor computerized devices=in particular for in-terfaces between such devices are some ofthe most prominent issues in the standardsarea in this decade.

Second; NBS is keeper of the standards formeasurementthe agency still keeps the offi-cial yardstick and thousands of other officialmeasurement standards hi its vault. As partof thisrole, NBS has also become involved inR&D for such PA devices as programmable"coordinate measuring machines" and otherelectronit Measurement devices that are in-creasingly used for quality control. NBS musthave the capability to certify the accuracy ofsuch machines, and it therefore porforms R&Don methods of measurement and methnds ofusing the measurements to improve qualityin production. NBS officials believe that theultimate trend in manufacturing, facilitatedby programmable automation, is toward fac-tories which "cannot make a bad pert." That

33 5

320 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

Table 67.Automation Research, National Bureau of Standards

Year Appropriation RelitibUraablea Taal Staff (FTF)'

1979 $1,150,000 $ 100,000 $1,250,000 12

1980 1,850,000 100,000 1,950,000 19

1981 2,450,000 100,000 2,550,000 Z51982 3,850,000 66;000 3,916,000 391983 ............. ..... 4,716,000 2,475,000 7;191;000 65,1984 (estimate) 3,850,000 3,700,000 7,550,000 751985 (preliminary) 3,900,000 4,800,000 8,700,000 75

age° contracted by otherbFull time equivalent.SOURCE: National Bureau of Standards.

Federal agencies, primarily the Department of Defense.

Photo credit: Nation'Bureitii of Standiude

A coordinate measuring machine undergoescalibration at the National Bureau of Standards

is, with various electronic measurement de-vices present in the production process andconnected electronically to PA control coth-puters, the production line could sense minorvariations in dimensions before they becamea defect, and thexontrol computers could senda signal to the pduction machines to correctthe variation, or shut down the machine formaintenance.

Third and finally, the Department of Com-merce was mandated by Congress in 1965 torecommend standards for the Federal Govern-ment's procurement and use of computers andto carry out supporting research in the scienceand technology of automated data processing.Acting on those mandates, 'NBS began workin the early 1970's on computer interfaces, in-cluding those involved with computer;con-trolled systems such as robots. Subsequently,

this latter work became part of a program onfactory automation technologies."

Among the highlights of NBS' automationR&D:

In 1979, OBS received funding from the.Air Force ICAM and other sources to de-velop a set of standards so that differentbrands of computer-aided design systemscould communicate with one another. Thestandards, called IGES (Initial GraphicExchange Standards), specify a commonformat for geometric 'data; essentially _alowest common_ denominator for CADsystems; Typically, the operator of a CADsystem can command his/her system totranslate a drawing frOnithe proprietarystorage format of the CAD manufacturerto the IGES format and record the IGESdata on a magnetic disk, which can thenbe read by a different: CAD systeth andreconverted to the second system's pro-prietary format.

IGES was released in a _preliminaryform in 1980, and was, adopted by CADmanufacturers in record time, according .

to NBS researchers; They speculate thatthe reason for this rapidity was that theCAD industry was "hniting", for a standardthat is, customer complainti anddissatisfaction about the inability to ex-change drawings betiVreen CAD systemshurt sales and liMited possible applita;tiona."

"itobert Hocken; chief; Automated Production TechnologyDivision, NBS; personal_ communication; Oct; 5; 1983.

"Relied Hcckini, Chief; Automated Production TechnologyDivision, NBS; OTA Automation Techbology Workshop. A sec-ond and third version of IGES have been launchid, building

Ch. 8.- Research and Development 327

With funding assistance from the AirForce and Navy, NBS researchers are de-signing and assembling an AutomatedManufacturing Research Facility(AMRF) to serve as a laboratory for vari-ous kinds of CIM R&D; The facility is be-ing constructed in a portion of the NBSmachining shop in Gaithersburg; Md;;which produces roughly $2;5 millionworth of parts annually for use by NBSresearchers. PA equipment manufactur,ers have donated several key pieces ofequipment for the project that are; insome cases, more advanced than commer-cially available prOducts. In this project,as in others in NBS automation R&D ef,forts, industry has loaned technical staffto work at NBS for a fixed period of time.In return, the firm gets firsthand knowl-edge of NBS R&D and enhanced oppor-tunities to transfer technologies devel-oped at NBS to their own labs. TheAMRF is constructed from "Off -the-shelf"hardware (i.e., the machine tools, robots,and other devices are bought from or do-nated by manufacturers from their prod-uct lines). because NBS argues that it issoftware and interface systems; not hard-ware; _which need to be developed furtherto enhance possibilities for automatedmanufacturing. In addition; NBS officialsworking with the AN are emphasizingthe possible applications of automatedtechnology for the large number of smallmachine shops which fabricate parts inbatches too small for conventional auto-mation, but large enough to enable theuse of PA.*NBS researchers also pursue a wide rangeof R&D;Lrelated to specific PA technolo-gies, including important work in the useof structured light for 3-D vision percep-tion; simulation of factory operations; andcontrol systems for automated factories;

on the initial version, aii-drnakers of 30 CAD systems have an-nounced that they subscribi to IGES. ("IGES Version Accom-modates Modelers," American Metal Market/MetalworkingNews, Dec. 13, 1982).

*OTA site visits; AMRF /NBS; Apr: 18, 1983; and Nov. 14;1983.

NBS staffers also contribute to standardsefforts by serving on and helping to coordinatethe many private sector standards committeesworking on automation issues;

National Science Foundation.--NSF alsoplays a significant role in funding of automa-tion research. Bedause of its interdisciplinarynature, several different parts of the agencycontribute to this work. Table 68 highlightssome of the programs within NSF which fundPA research; NSF has tried to rationalize andcoordinate its funding in this area by estab-lishing in 1981 a Coordinating Committee onResearch on Intelligent Robotic Systems; andby issuing in 1983 a "Program Announcementin Intelligent Robotics Systems and Auto-mated Manufacturing," which sets forth thepossible avenues for funding.

The Production Research Program in theEngineering Directorate* is directly focusedon programmable automation for discretemanufacturing; This program has grownrapidly in the past .5 yearsfrom $2 -3 millionin 1980 to $4 -6 million in 1984but is stillrelatively small; Although exact figures arenot available; NSF officials estimate that thefunding for PA research fromall programs atNSF might be 1.5-2 times as much as thebudget of Production Research, or roughly $7to $9 Million_in 1984. In fiscal'year 1383, theProduction Research Program included 17projects in CAD, 47 projects in various as-pects of computer-aided manufacturing tech,nologies, and 11 projects in computer -aidedtesting. Production research, in collaboration

citwith NSF's Industry-University CooperativeResearch Program, also provided seed,m neyfor two new industry-university research lc-en-ters; one in robotics at the University of RlyxleIsland; and one in materials handling at eor-gia Tech.**

*NSF is divided into six directorates (administation;astronomical, atmospheric, Jmu-th, and ocean sciences; biological,behavioral, and social sciences; engineering; mathematiial andphysical sciences; BM scleutific; tec and intern donalaffairs). Each direaorate has four-or five divisions. 1

""*Fror example, General Electric (GE) _reported that its7:ecent-ly released "BinVision" system was based on machine vision re-search conducted at the University of Rhode Island. GEI is oneof 27 companies, in addition to NSF,_which_fand the eenter."Vision Sensors Expanding Industrial Rbliot Flatibility,"1AVia-tinn Vr&ak and Space Technology, May 30, 1983, p. 139.

33.

322 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Empfoym

IR

Scale model of the Automated Manufacturing. Research FIn Gaith

;Tr,-.1r

r.

A robot, part of the Automated ManUfacturing Research F.1are delivered by aul

r; Education, and the Workplace

Photo credit: National Bu

Ility being constructed at the National Bureau ofburgi Md.

L

,

Photo credit: National Bo

lity; grasps metal "blinks" to be machined/ from titatic guided vehicles

ICh: aResearch and Development 32

Table 68.Selected NSF Programs Which Fund Alitrithation-Related ResearchProgram Aspects of_antorrixtioriAutomation; bioengineering, and sensing systems Touch and vision sensors, control systemsComputer engineering Robot programing languages, computer architectures, human-

cbmputer interface,Electrical and_optical communications

Communication_networks, integrated optics for vision sensorsIndustry/university cooperative research Seed funds for cooperative iridUStry/UniVeraity research centersMechanical systems Mechanical aspects of rdbots, CAD ,Production research All aspects of factory automation:for discrete manufacturingQuantum electronics, waves and beams Sensors and processes lasers .Small business innovation Incentive_grants for research In small high teOhriblogy firmsSolid state and microstructure engineering Fabrication of miniature deViCeS lot sensing and controlSystams_theory and operation research Large- scale systems control, scheduling, organizationSOURCE: National Science FOUndatiell; "Program Announcement in Inteilligent Robotics Systems and Automated ManUtieturIng," No. 3145 -0058, 1983.

A new initiative for fiscal year 1985 aims toprovide $10 million as seed funds to establish5-10 centers for doss-disciplinary engineeringresearch. It is likely that one or more of thesecenters, will be focused on automation:

Other programs at NSF which fund workrelated to PA include Automation, Bioen-gineering,-arid--Sensing-SystemK-ComputerEngineering; _ElectriCal and Optical Cora-municatioria; Mechanical Systems; and Sys-tems Theory and Operation Research. In ad-dition, prcigraine in social sciences and policyanalysis include a small amount of work on thesocial effects of new technologies such as

_programmable_autoniation.

The primary funding mechanism at NSF isgrants made in response to unsolicited re-search proposals; which are evaluated by NSFstaff and external_ reviewers; Few if anyStrings are attached regarding the nature ofdirection of the Work. However, NSF is alsomandated eo encourage transfer of science andtechnology industr-yv.and several programswhich fund PA research take an active role infacilitating such transfer. Three staff membersfrom the Industrial Science- and Technologi-cal Innovation Division, for example, in col-laboration with eight other experts, recentlystudied the diffusion _process and called forsnore coherent and supportive government pol-icy in this area:'2

G.l'ortiaLzly. W. A. Hetzner, and J. D. Eve land (Nationalc,ence FolindatiOn, Division of Industrial Science and Tech-

nolo&ill Innovation), "Fostering the Use of Advanced Manu-facturing Technology," Technology Re-view; in prase, 1984.

Taking advantage of advanced manufac-turing capabilities is a protess which willrequire considerably morc, and more systematic, attention to.the phenothenon of deploy-ment than has heretofore been generally inevidence in U.S. industry.

This and related Governinent policy issueswill be examined in Chapter 10.

National Aeronautics and Space Adrninis-trntion.NASA pnrsues threezeneral typesof programmable automation R&D. They aresummarized in table 69.

The first_ is robotics and teleoperator re-Search-to-develop manipulators for applica-tions on space missions. Near-term NASA,uses will involve teleoperators rather than ro-bots. Their movements will be controlled moreor less directly by a human, who is eitherspace or on the ground. For example, theSpace Shuttle's irell-knOwn Remote Manipu-lator System, which reaches into the shuttle'scargo bay to extract and manipulate satellites,is controlled by the shuttle's flight crews Be-cause of the relatively direct human controlof the televperator, human factor§ research todevelop the most effective combinations ofman and machine is very prominent in thepro-gram NASA researchers expect people to re-main in direct control of these devices for sometime because of the complexity of the tasks.

The robotics_andrteleoperator work is nowfocused on a "Rem4e Orbital Servicing Sys-tern," an unmanned space vehicle that wouldbe capable of Servicing satellites by ground

.339

t Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Emplc

AIR

Top, the space shuttle's manipulator anmanipulator as it di

Ch. 8.Research and Development 325

Table 69.NASA Automation Research (dollars In thousands)

Fiscal year1980 1981 1982 1983 .1984_. X985- (pr&4i

Automation research program:Robotics/teleoperators .................. ............. $_ 538 $_ 245 $ 600 $1;600 $1,600 $1,600Artificial intelligence/computer-aided planning ..... 1;048 1;017 1,065 2,000 2,000 2,000Integrated program for aerospace vehicle design (IPADja . NA 5,000 2,100 2,300 2,300 2,500Total NA 6,262 3,765 5;900 5;900 6;100

NANot available.Note Figures do not Include salaries of NASA personnel, which are budgeted separately.alPAD figures include NASA funds only. The Navy also contributes to the program, and plans to spend an additional S2 million for IPAD In 1985:SOURCE National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

control commands to its manipulator arm."For the future, NASA is exploring machine vi-sion and AI systems which would allow a serv-icing vehicle to conduct repairs somewhatautonomously. Most of this researchla con-ducted in-houSe at the Jet Propulsion-tabor-atory and at Langley Research Center. NASAalso supp-orts research work at the Universityof Illinois and Stanford Urdversity.

The second major area of NASA's involve-ment in programmable automation R&D is thedevelopment of an advanced computer-aidedplanning system called "Deviser, developedat the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in responseto the complicated and sometimes conflictingneeds for scheduling NASA's recent un-manned scientific missions (the Voyager se-ries). The Voyager craft is radioed signals todirect its trajectory, aim its telescopes andcameras, and manipulate other scientificequipment. Dozens of NASA scientists re-quest the attention of the satellite for particu-lar experiments, and according to one NASAresearcher, it takes hundreds of man-yeara todevelop efficient plans and tell the spacecraftwhat to do.' Deviser uses sophisticated pro--graining techniques to juggle the capabilitiesof the satellite and the demands of the scien-tists, resulting in an order-of-magnitude in-crease in productivity, according to NASA of-ficials.

"A: J. mei-nrel; Jr. and R. L Larien, "NASA Research In Tele3peration and Robotics," paperpresented_at the Society ofPhoto-Optical Instrumentation Engineers Conference; Aug. 23-?7, 1982.

R. L. Larsen, Computer Science and EleetreniCa OffiCe,1ASA, personal communication, Aug. 25, 1983.

The final area of NASA's involvement inautomation R&D is an effort called IntegratedPrograms for Aerospace Vehicle Design(IPAD), which was begun in 1976. It is a jointNASA/industry program whose goal is to in-tegrate computer-aided deSign and engineer-ing systems used in the deSign of aerospacevehicles, and to link them with powerful soft-ware systems which could help manage thetremendous amount of information involvedin designing such a complex pr5duct. BoeingCommercial Airplane Co. is the prime contrac=for for the IPAD R&D effort.

Other Federal Agenciel--_-Several other Fed-eral agencies fund small R&D efforts, primar-ily in robotics for nonmanufacturing applica-tions. These include the Department ofEnergy, which is interested in the uee of robotsto service nuclear i:vizwer facilities. The Depart;ment of Agriculture has also recently been in-vestigating use of robotics for various agricul-tural applicationi. The Department ofTransportation's Transportation SystemsCenter has conducted R&D in robotics for mo-tor vehicle manufacture in the _past, but thecurrent administration views such work as theresponsibility of indnstry.

Summary and ConclusionsCivilian Agen-cies. Table 70 summarizes the programmableautomation R&D supported or conductedby Federal civilian agencies. The three Fed-eral agencies prim y concerned with PAeach have very diffe ent roles. NBS plays aunique role in three espects:

1. Support of star aids efforts for PA de-vices, and relev t research to determine

341

326 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

Table 70.=-Summary: Federal Civilian Agency R&D In Programmable Automation,Fiscal Year 1984 (in millions)

Naticinal Bureau Of Standards (at NBS labs In Gaithersburg; MO:NBS4unded work.... ... . ............... . ..... 3.85Work sponsored by other Federal agencies (primarily tjavy.andAir Force funding for automated manufacturing research facili-ty) 3.708

NBS TotalNational AeronautICS and Space Administration (approximately

two-thirds is conducted in NASA's in-house labs, and one-third_is grantslcontracts_to non-NASA labs):Teleoperator research 1.60Artificial ihtelligence/computer-aided planning 2.00!PAD 2.30_IPA() work funded by Navy 1.8758

NASA totalNational Science Foundation (all grants/contracts to universities

and nonprofit labs):Production Research Program .....Other NSF grants centrally concerned with PA

from a variety of programs (estimate)NSF total

Total for civilian agencies

4:60

2 30-4.60

3.85

5.90

6.W-9.20

16 6c-1R.95

8NOt included in civilian total.SOURCE: National Bureau of Standards, NatiOnal Aeronautics and Space Administration, National Wane Foundation.

how best to construct standards, partic-ularly for interfaces between Pk devices.

2. Development of the AMRF, perhaps theonly full-scale test bed for integrated PAresearch using some of the most advancedtechnologies that have be-en developed._

3. Serving as a resource to other Federalagencies and to the private sector on arange of issues related to PA.

NSF is the Government's only avenue forsupport of generic research on a broad rangeof subjects related to PA, although availablefunds are limited. Hence, NSF supports longerterm research in many areas which might notreceive funding from mission-oriented agenciessuch as DOD or NASA. In addition, NSFfunds provide crucial support to universitiesfor building the foundation of automationR&Dmaintaining to finical expertise in theuniversities and helping to train new technicalexperts through students' involvement in re-search work.

NASA's aims for automation R&D are coth;plea and specialized. However, these effortscould have substantial spinoffs in the longer_term.

342

industry-Funded R&DThe amount of money and effort which in-

dustry as a_vv_hole spend§ on programmable au:tomation R &D is hard to gauge. Statisticsabout R&D tend to be either protected by pro-prietary concerns or muddled by inconsistentdefinitions of R&D and industry classifica-tions. With increasing Federal tax incentivesfor R&D activities, many firms seem to havebroidened the set of activities and expendi-tures to which they attach the label, "R&D.""

Nevertheles§, several agencies and researchfirms have made estimates of R&D expendi-tures in various classes of industry, includingcomputers, and mechanical manufacturing(see table 71). No similar effort has been un-dertaken for PA vendors as aoup. However,examinations of R&D in information technol-ogy-related industries tend to reveal a patternof fairly consistent and comparatively highspending for R&D as a proportion of grosssales. By combining estimates of grosS salesin automation industries with induStry end-

!' National -Science Powidation, Science Resources StudiesHighlights, Sept. 9, 1982.

Ch. 8. Research and Development 327

Table 71.Company R&D Expenditures as a Proportion of Sales, By Industry

NSFa1980

Business Weekb1980 1981 1982

Machinery ................. ...... 4.8Officecomputing, accounting 10.0 4.3-6.4 5.0.6.4 5.1-7.2Other machinery, except electrical 2.3 1.6 1.9 2.6

Electrical equipment 3.9 2.8 2.9 2.8Radio and TV receiving equipment 1.6Communication equipment 5.2

Motor vehicles_ 4.3 4.0 3.7 4.0Motor vehicles parts and equipment 1.9 2 0_ 2.3

aNatIonal_Schinte_FoundAtion,lieaearch_and Development In Industry, 1980." Data are based on a survey of approximately11,500 companies, conducted by the Bureau of the Census

bBusiness Week, "R&D Scoreboard," July ES, 1981. July 5, 1982, and June 20, 1983. Data are based on the amount of R&D spend.Ing reported-to the-Securltaisandladhange CommielTon on i-orm 10-1C-CompaniasTncluded are those reporting sales forthe_year of $35 million or more_andR&Dexpenses amounting loaf ituVef 11 million or_atleast 1 percent of sales. Industryclassifications used by Business Week are similar, but not Identical to those used by NSF. Hence the two sets of data arenot strictly comparable.

lysts' assessment of the percentage of grosssales spent on R&D, one can arrive at an estimated range for automation industry spend-ing on R&D (table 72).

Such estimates are possible only for the pro-grammable automation technologies that com-prise an industrynotably CAD, robotics,_ andmachine tools. Table 72 shows that R&Dspenclingin Apt these three industries was ap-proximately $264 million .to $400 million in1983. This is roughly 3 to -5 times as much asthe approximately $80 million spent by Fed-er-al agencies for the whole range of program-mable automation R&D. PA-industry spend-ing for R&D has increased rapidly in the pastfew years; in parallel with high industrygrowth rates particularly for robots and CAD.(See ch. 7 for further detail.) However, robotsindustry analysts expect the proportion ofgross sEdes spent on R&D in that industry to

decline from an estimated 12 to 18 percent to10 to 12 percent as sales in the industry ac-celerate.

Only a few companies conduct substantialwork in more long-range basic or applied PAresearch, as opposed to relatively short-ter-mproduct development (although it should benoted that such product devdopmenta provideimportant feedback to more long-term re-search efforts regarding productive directionsfor R&D). These more long-range efforts in-clude IBM's research, primarily in roboticsand sensing technologies; GE's work in rotwt-ics, sensing, computerized controllers, andCIM; GM's research in robotics; CincinnatiMilacron's efforts in robotics; machine tools;automated materials handling, and flexiblemanufacturing systems; Unimation's (nowowned by Westinghouse) robotics research;and Computervision's CAD explorations. It

Table 72.Estimated R&D Expenditures in PA industries, 1983 (in millions)

) Industry salesCAD r--- ' ,

Robots L,.Machine tools

Total

Estimated percent of salesspenton R&D

Estimated level ofR&D spending

$1;600 12-18 $192-5288$ 235 12-18 $ 28-$ 42$1,750a 2.5-4.0 $ 44-$ 70

$264.$400-National Machine Tool Builder's Association. Note that the U.S. machine tool industry has been experiencing drarn-Alc changes in level of sales. For example, shipmentsIn 1982 totaled 13.7 million, while those In 1981 totaled $5.1 million.

SOURCE: Interviews and compilation of material from Industry analysts.

34325-452 0 84 22 : QL 3

328 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and Me Workplace

should be noted that users of automation tech-nologies; particularly large firms such as-GMand GE; are playing important roles in R&Dand have in many cases become vendors them-selves (see ch, 7),

In addition, some of the large consulting andresearch firms have played key roles in devel-opment of programmable automation technol-ogies. SRI International has been a pioneer inmachine vision and robotics research; DraperLaboratories has conducted robot and FMS,research; and consults with industry on imple-mentation of automation systems; other"think tanks" such as Battelle Laboratorieand Arthur D, Little have played key roles inboth research on the teclinelOgies and assist;ing in implementation.

There is also evidence of more extensive in-teraction in the past few years between indus-try and academia on manufacturing automa-tion research. Many universities have set upcooperative research centers in which firmscontribute funds to support manufacturing-re-lated research efforts: These centers vary inthe extent to which industry has a say in theresearch agenda and control over the resiilts.'

One kind of university-industry cooperativeprogram is the Manufacturing EngineeringApplications Center (MEAC) at the WorcesterPolytechnic Institute (WPI): Here; professorsand students work with staff from companiesto develop specific applications of automatedequipment: Emhart Corp, helpecttoestabliShand was the first to work with WPI Qn sucha project: For Emhart, the goals of the pro-gram were to obtain:"

1. assistance in conducting practical; short-term applications research that would ad-here to industrial time lines and result incompleted projects delivered to Emhartwithin 1 year;

2. a situation that would promote technol-ogy transfer(i,e,; that would help thefirms receiving the systems to Understandthe development processes and the opera-tions of the systems themselves); and

"'IOTA Education and Training case study.

3. provision of laboratory and office spaceon the campus for Ethhart engineers toenable thein to work in an environmentfree from production pressures and re-sponsibilitieS.

MEAC's liaison with Emhart resulted in sev-eral applications developedsfor the company'sfactories; and MEAC has now expanded to in-clude two other firms.

Another form of industry-university effortis the Industrial Affiliates program at Carne-gie-Mellon University's Robotics Institute.Various industrial sponsors (Westinghouse isone of the largest) contribute more than $2 mil-lion per year." The institute includes labs inflexible assembly; flexible manufacturing, in-telligent systems; vision; mobile roots, smartsensors; automatic programing, anir'social im-pacts analysis: The sponsors, however, do nothave control overresearch agendas, but ratherhave priority in obtainingthe research resultsand are entitled to likaited consulting servicefrom the Institute faCiilty. This more limitedimpact on research agendas is generally thenorm at top engineering schools with similarprograms, such as MIT and Stanford.

Industry-university cooperative researchcenters are spreading rapidly. Though it is notfeasible to list all_of them; other universitieswhich undertake PA research in cooperationwith industries include the Univarsity ofRhode Island; Georgia Institute of Teechnolo=gy (both discussed earlier in the NSF section),Purdue; the University of Florida, and the Uni=varsity of Maryland.*

One of the most dramatic industry movesto support university PA research was IBM'sdonation of $50 million in cash and equipmentin 1983 to support manufacturing education.The grants were given to about two dozenschools$10 million was allocated to uniireicsities to implement new manufacturing=

"The Robotics Institute, Carnegie-Mellon University, "TheIndustrial Affiliates Program."

*Others in the growing list include the University of Michi-gan, Brigham Young University, and the University of Utah.

34q

Ch. 8.Research and Development 329

systems curricula at thernaster's degree leveli.While $40 million in CAD and other computerequipment was donated to support 'researchand education in manufacturing using state-of-the-art tools.

Finally; there are several interfirm cooper-ative research efforts relevant to programma-ble automation.* CAM-I; based in Arlington;Tex., has eight active research groups in whichmembers pool hinds to support research inareas of interest. The groups are SculpturedStirfaces, Process Planning, Geometric Model-ing, Advanced NC, Factory Management,Electronics Automation, Quality Assurance,and Robotics Software. CAM-I was a spinofffrom DOD's early efforts to develop NC ma-chine tools. Now independent of DOD, themembership of CAM-I includes American andforeign companies as well as some universitiesand Government agencies. The members paya fee for each of the seven research groups inwhich they choose to participate, ranging from$8;000 to $10,000:** In return they have avoice in the direction of research and receivecopies of all the reports; documentation; andscftware produced in the research group. CAM-Idoes not actually conduct the research in-house, but contracts for research efforts in in-dustry and private laboratories;

Microelectronics and Computer Corp. (MCC)is a controversial collective research effortformed in 1982; and aimed at research on ad-vanced semiconductor and computer architec-ture technologies; Based in Austin; Tex.; MCCperforms much of its research in-house withabout 50 researchers; It has a $75 million an-nual budget contributed by 13 medium-sizedelectronics manufacturersother group; theSenticonductor Research Corp;; consists of 19electronics flints. It has already grant6d morethan $8 zriillion to support university researchthat would advance -the technology of inte-grated circuit manufacture."

*Some of the consortia which pursue integrated manufactur-ing R&D came together, either formally or informally; throu &hDOD. For example, several parts of the Air Force's ICAM pro-gram brought together a variety of industry contractors andsubcontractors:

**CAM-I brochures.'" "High -Tech Companies Team Up in the R&D Race," Busi-

ness Week, Aug. 15, 1983, pp. 94-95._

The issue of cooperative research efforts hasbeen hotly debated over the past 2 to 3 years.In some cases, industry executives have ar-gued that theability of foreign companies, par-tictilarly in japan; to form R&D collectives(sometimes with government assistance) givesthem an unfair advantage over Americanfirms. Often, the perceptions of what antitrustlaw will permit do not mesh with the law itaelf.In general, collective research is permittedunder current U.S. law, though there may belegal difficulties if, for example, the firms in-volved are those which dominate an industryor if they wish to restrict access to the resultsof the effort.'9

The issue of -what constitutes an appropri-ate area for collective R&D is not at all clear.Some industry observers argue_ that the ad-vantages of collective R&D are, by and large,illusorywhile Japanese ctiltural habits en-courage group efforts of all kiiids, Americancompanies perform better in mutual competi-tion.2°

in any case; there seem to be at least threeadvantages in principle to some collectiveR&D endeavors: First, a collective effort maybe useful if there are high costs and risks in-volved, with uncertain and long-term pay-backs. Certain problems in programmable au-tomation fit this description. R&D incomputer-integratM manufacturing, for exam-ple, requiies an immense investment in equip-ment and tremendous labor costs because ofthe complexity of running and modifying sucha system. Second, CIM is clearly an interdis-ciplinary problem, and a collective effort couldbe useful in bringing together expertise from;for example, a machine tool manufacturer, acomputer manufacturer; a materials handlingsystem manufacturer; and so forth; And final-ly; collective research efforts can afford smal-ler companies the opportunity to enter or stayin a market where R&D costs would be pro-

"U.S. Department of Justice, Antitrust Division, AntitrustGuide Concerning Research Joint Ventures (Washington, D.C.:Department of Justice. November 1980). OTA's forthcomingstudy, Information Technology Research and Development, willdiscuss joint ventures in R&D in more detail.

'°OTA Automation Technology Workshop, May 29, 1983.

34

30 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

hibitively high if they were conducting suchwork independently. Nevertheless, a_ great dealof R&D in programmable automation is tak-ing place without_ collective efforts, and pro-motion of such efforts may not be necessaryin this area.*

Other Sources of Funding for R&DIn addition to the Federal Government and

industry, a small portion of R&D funds areprovided by State and local governments, non-profit organizations or ioundations, and byuniversities. Often this funding is in conjunc-tion with efforts to set up local high-technol-ogy centers, for the purpose of attracting orrevitalizing local industry, or for retraininglocal workers. Such centers' are proliferatingrapidly throughout the country.

Michigan, for example, has established an"Industrial Technology Institute" to help easethe State's adoption of advancedinanufactur-ing technologies. The institute has receivedgrants from the Dow Foundation ($10 million),the Michigan Economic Development Author-ity ($17.5 million), and the Kellogg Founda-

*Further. current research efforts in automated manufactur-ing, for example at NBS and GE, suggest that the scale of ef-fort required for integrated manufacturing research is not asmassive as that in, for example, the development of new air-craft engines. Such initiatives may require R&D expenditureson the order of $1 billion. (Seer for example. R. Witkin, "7 Com-panies to Spend $1 Billion on Jet Engine," The New Yorknmes, Nov. 1, 1983, p. DI.)

tion ($40 million)." The State of Rhode Islandhas proposed "Industrial Greenhouses" tocapitalize, in part, on robotics technology de-veloped at the University of Rhode Island.-Even the State of Hawaii has made a $50,000grant to the 'University of Hawaii to launcha Pacific International Center for High Tech-nology Research."

These are only a few examples of the manylocal centers which have been proposed or es-tablished. The proliferation of such centers isevidence that many States and regions believethat computerized manufacturing automation w6

technologies are "the wave of the future."However, only a finite number of such centersfor robotics, for example, can operate effective-ly. And establishing such a center always in-volves tradeoffs with other local priorities.*

""Smith Heads High-tech Group Pushing Advanced Facto-ries," Automotive News,_JWy Il, 1983.

"A. A. Smyser, "I;ow Performance on Hi-Tech," HonoluluStar-Bulletin, Aug. 9, 1983. This decision was relatively con-troversial in Hawaii. State Senator Mary George lambasted theprogram, asking, "What are we doing in this world-class com-petition when we are bsically a sand-!lt team?"

For more information on this and related issues; see the re-cent OTA studies, Census of State Government Initiatives forHigh-Technology Industrial Development (May 1983) and Ercom.agfrq; High-Technology Development (February 1984).Both of the aforementioned are bacicground papersfor the forth-coming OTA study, Technology, Innovation, and Regional E'co-nomic Development.

International Comparisons in R&DForeign R&D efforts m PA are tremendous-

ly varied. This analysis will elucidate certainthemes in the content of foreign R&D, andpoint out strengths in particular foreign re-search programs. Institutional issues concern-ing foreign R&D (e.g., research cooperativesand government R&D support), are addressedin the International Comparisons chapter (ch.9).

In order to analyze international R&D, thelevel of R&D must be treated separately fromthe level of application of automation technol-ogies. Hence, while certain other countries ex-ceed the United States in use of PA (see chs.7 and 9) the vast majority of R&D in program-mable automation has taken place in theUnited States. Japan, West Germany, andSweden, and to a lesser extent France and

Ch. 8.Research and Development 331

Great Britain; have also become importantcontributors to automation R&D.

One indicator of the relative contributionsof different countries to this technology is thenumber ofpatents that residents of each coun-try hold. Patents are not a good index of qual-ity of innovation, nor is it assured that foreigninnovations that are not marketed_here_will bepatented in the United States (and thereforeavailable as statistics). However, it may never-theless be instructive to examine the interna-tional distribution of U.S._ patents. A 1982study by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Of-fice showed that U.S. residents hold 51 per-cent of the U.S. patents for robotics; while theJapanese hold 24.5 percent and residents of

20

18

16

14

12

10

8

12:]IMOther

other countries (largely West Germany, Swe-den; France, and Italy) hold the remainder."Figure 38 shows that U.S. drYninance in U.S.robotics patents has been erratic but generallystrong.

Moreover, automation technology re-searchers believe, almost unanimously, thatthe United States is still in the lead or at leastequivalent in level of sophistication in vir-tually all areas of R&D." A typical comment

"U. S.Tatent and nademnric Office, U.S. Department of Goro-merce, Industrial Roliots: A Survey of Foreign and DomesticU.S. Patents (Washington, D.C.: Department of Commerce;August 1982).

240TA Automation Technology Workshop, various personalcommunications.

Figure 38.Patent Activity by Country Comparison

United States

Japan

`MP NNW

'OP

1969 1970 1971

`January M March 1992

1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977

Date of patent grant

1978 1979 1980 1981 1982a

SOURCE: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Industrial Robots: A Survey of Foreign and Domestic U.S. Patents, August 1982.

332 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace/-------

is this one from an Army technical officer'sJapan trip report: "No equipment was seenduring the trip that lead (sic) me to believe theJapanese had any sort of technology edge inthe robotics area. In fact, much of their recentwork in the machine vision area OWes a tech-nology debt to R&D performed by such firmsES SRI International.' 25 This position is oftenvoiced defensively by U.S. technology expertsas foreign government efforts, particularly inJapan, have received increased-attention.

Japan.It is by now a cliche that Japan'sfundamental strength has been in applyingtechnologiesather than in more fundamentalinnovations. There is a moderate .consensus onthis point, though there is not a consensus onits significance. Sortie argue that it is sensi-ble for a country to emphasize applicationswhen another country (the United States) isa strong leader in technical areas. In any case,the Japanese have taken steps to bolster theircapacity in areas which they have not hereto-fore emphasized, including software and morefundamental research. A 1982 Japanese WhitePaper explains:26-

. . . It has also been said that Japanead tech;nology has for the most part been introducedfrom other industrially advanced nations,and that only a few innovations have beencreated by Japanese scientists and engineers.

Meanwhile, prevailing situations seem tosuggest that the once active creation of newtechnologies by foreign countries has lost itsglamour at the moment; in addition; there aremany instances in which foreign countriesand business corporations appear reluctant,as a strategic measure, to transfer the limitedscope of remaining technological know-howto Japan. Given these circumstances, it hasbecome absolutely necessary for Japan to de-velop creative technologies on her own if sheis to maintain her economic viability amongthe-world's industrially advanced nations, __

m`C. S. Shoeriiiiker, Special Projects Office, U.S. Artny_HumanEngineering Laboratory, OCONUS Trip Report," dates oftravel:: Oct, 4 -17; 1981. Many similar sentiments were expressedtit _tilt OTA Automation Technology Workshop; May 29,_1983.

of Creativity in Science and Technology Outlineof White Paper on Science and Technology 1982," Science andTechnolos; in Japan. vol. 2, Apr. 1, 1983, pp. 18-23. ,

The Japanese plan for bolstering innovativecapacity involves establishing long-rangeR&D efforts, setting up various new programsfor researchers, promoting public understand-ing of the issue, and pursuing active interna-tional cooperation in science and technologydevelopment

This plan is one of several wide-ranging ef-forts that the Japanese have announced in the_past few years. Others include developmentplans for the "fifth generation" computer proj-ect and the "Flexible Machining ComplexEquipped with Laser (FMCflaser). ' The Jap-anese seem to have a propensity for establish-ing plans and goal:, which far exceeds that ofmany other countries, even those such as theUnited States whose research in these areasis extensive. This has led one compUter, ---expert to complain, "We're being out-brio-chured."27

Many of these ambitious efforts have notyet shown substantial results. The FMCflaserproject is a good example. Begun in 1977 witha budget of approximately $6 million a yearin g ernment money and significant pnvate-sect support; the project was designed topr e an advanced; "metamorphic" (i.e.,easil changed) machining-cell Which-W:6.111duse a laser both for cutting metal and formeasurement; However; the_resiilt of the proj-ect is neith:q. advanced nor flexible, accordingto an NBS official, and the use of a laser wasmore a political decision than a technical one(i.e., it brought the electrical engineering com-munity in Japan into the project).

The program has broken little new techni-cal ground. It has bad to retreat from themost ambitious technical goals of the pro-gram. When asked about these apparenttechnical failures; the MITI people respondedthat this did not matter, that the true goal-of the program was to create a national teamto work on automated manufacturing andthat this goal was accomplished."

"Neil Lincohi, Control Data Corp:; OTA Workshop on Ad-vanced Computer Architecture, July 14, 1983.

"J. A. Simpson, director, Center for Manufacturing En,gineer-, NBS, "FMC/Laser vs. AMRF: A Comparison," speech to

Manufacturing Studies Board of the National Academy of En-gineering, 1982. Simpson arranged an exchmige between the

Ch. 8.Research and Development 333

The product of the FMC/laser project turnedout to be considerably simpler than its goalsimplied, somewhat like a mass-production linewhich can be easily reconfigured. Whether ornot this was intended, the notion of simplicityseems to be an underlying theme in severalJapanese automation prOdUcta and develop-ment efforts. Japanese FMSs, for example;tend to be substantially smaller andwithout the complex recovery methods forworn tools and bypass-loops in Material-handling tracks which characterize U.S. de-signs. Au engineer for Niigata Engineering Co.explained to one reporter, "Complex systemsare prone to failures . . . we don't want our SyS=tems to stop, not more than a few timesyear." 29

Further, Japanese FMSe seem to place low-er emphasis on the goal of completely un-manned production, instead replaeing "somework slots where logical"'° and leaving otherjobs for human workers. These principles mayseem to contradict reports of unmanned pro-duction at certain Japanese factories, partic-ularly the well -known Fanuc factory near Mt.Fuji. However; even this plant, upon cloaer ex=amination, reveals a reliance upon human

and relatively simple processes. Atnight, NC machiiiing takes place without di= =tett human superviaion; _although a workermonitors the pickinCtion floor from a controlrOOM. Workers are still key features of the pro-duCtion equipment during the day. Each NCmachine tool has an operator who is primari-ly responsible for its performance.3'

FMC/laser project and NBS' AMRF Staff. Japan's MITI hasannounced that the pr6duct of the FMC/laser project will bemade part of anew_test plant for computerized. unmanned op-,ation. scheduled to be completed hl 1984. (M._ Inaba "MITIBuilds Laser-eqwipped Flexible Manufacturing System," Amer-ican Metal Market/Metalworking IVews, Nov. 21, 19831

"M. Inaba, In FMS, Simplicity Governs: Japan's Philoso-phy of Design Differs Somewhat From the U.S. Approach,"American Afetal Market/Metalworuig News; Japanese Ma-chine Tools Supplement; July 11, 1983.

"Ibid."ee N. Usui, "Untended Machines Build M achines," Amer-

ican Machinist, June 1982; pp. 142-145. There have been con-flicting reports on the number of workers at the plant. In addi-tion, several other portions of the plant use human workerseitensiVely, notably for assembly.

The Japanese are very active in R&D On industrial robota. recent. JIRA survey notesthat the number of government and universityrobot R&D facilities in Japan has doubled overthe past 3 years.32 The number of robot re-search facilities in. Japan, according to JIRA,exceeds the number existing in the UnitedStates, but such a claito has not been veri-fied.33 Until 1982, private induSti-Sr had shoul-dered the major responsibility for JapaneseR&D in the robotics field. ACtording to aJIRA survey in 1979, over tWo=thirda of ro-bot manufacturers had conducted some formof in-house robot research. Private researchhas concentrated mainly on application:--i.e.,on speed, miniaturization, computer control,weight reduction;and development of inter-changeable robots; 34

Other International Comparisons.Forhistorical, social and political reasons, coun-tries have different strengths and weaknessesin R&D areas. There are many areas in whichthe United States is a strong internationalleader. These include:

Long-range basic science research, wherethe U.S. university system is unmatchedin size and effectiveness.Artificial intelligence, where themost im-portant centers for AI work have longbeen in the United States (MIT, Stanford,CMU, and SRI International; the :Quiver-sity of Edinburgh, Scotland, is also a his-torically important center but somewhatless prominent today).Software as a whole, which appears tostem from American dominance of thecomputer field. CAD and computergraphics in particular are Americanstrengths. The United Kingdom recentlyhas developed a very good reputation and

"Mutsuko Murakami, "Japan Stresses BAD in High-Per-formance Robots." American Metal Market, July 11, 1983, p.9-A,

"Eiji Nakano, "Potentialities of Japanese Robot Industry,"Journal of Japanese Trade and Industry, published by JapanEconomic Foundation; January 1982; p. 7.

"P. Aron; Daiwa securities America, "Rebots Revisited: OneYear Later." Report No. 25, July 28, 1981.

34

334 Corifputer ?zed ManUtacturing Automat,- On: Employment; Education, and Ma Wotkplace

market in software as well. Japan is ap-parently attempting to catch up in soft-ware by weling R&D efforts. In 1982; forexample, 25 Japanese corporations_ en-tered into a joint agreement with the Uni-versity of Tokyo to develop software formechanical design."Systems of computerized devices (includ-ing programmable automation) are in gen-eral more sophisticated in the UnitedStates than in other countries.

However, there are several areas in whichother countries are leaders:

The field of manufacturing engineerffighas undergone a slump in the UnitedStates in the past decade, according tomany observers, with the best engineersavoiding work that was considered less in-tellectually exciting and "dirtier" thanmore theoretical efforts. Although thisSlump has occurred in other countries aswell, West Germany's industries andtechnical universities have maintained avery strong program of production re-search and. manufacturing_ engineering.Research, although partly funded by thegovernment, is conducted autonomouslythrough industryhmiverait3r conSortia.West Germany and Sweden have beenvery strong in precision machine taols androbots, in part because of the understand-ing of mechanical processes obtained fromthese_ institutes.Two foreign research efforts, one a jointNorwegian;West German program andthe other under Hitachi in Japan, are pur-suing ambitious work in developingmorefully integrated CIM, starting with thegeometric modeling of the product. Bothprojects aim to produce preliminary prod-ucts in the next 2 years. At this time itis unclear how these projects compare

"Industry and Trade Strategies, unpublished paper preparedfor OTA, April 1983.

3 3 0

with integration work; particular-ly at GE, IPAD and ICAM, and NBS.European countries in general are strong-er in research relating to the effect ofautomation technologies on the work en-vironment. This work is particularly em-phasized in Sweden; where the SwedishWork Environment Fund achninisters re-search funded by the government anddustry. Chapter 5 covers these efforts inmore detail.

. . iiThere is significant interest n programma-ble automation in Eastern Bloc countries, al-though there is limited information on theirefforts. One U.S. robotics researcher, after atour of the U.S.S.R., wrote:"

Overall, I must conclude that the roboticstechnology in Russia is at least a dUcade be-hind that in the Unit(Td States. They have ap-parently, recognized this fact end now havea national program in this emerging t.ech-riology.

Another writer described v,,,ry substantial devel-opment efforts, particularly for FMS, in EastGermany, Czechoslovakia and the U.S.S.R."East Germany has a well-developed machine-tool industry and an extensive program onrobotics development. Bulgaria and Polandhave factoriet Which produce manipulators."On the whole, evidence seems to indicate thatthe Eastern Bloc countries are a few yearsbehind the West, though there are concertedeffcatS in these countries to correct this situa-tion. Reliable data and descriptions of pro-.grams in Eastern Bloc countries are rarelyava table.

"D. TesiTr-, director, Center for Intelligent Machines and Re=botics, University Of Florida-. personal communication; Aug. 3,1951.

"CAM: An International Comparison, " American Ma1st; November 1981; special report 740. (The section on East-ern Europe was written by Jozsef Hatvany of the HungarianAcademy of Scienceal-

"B. Roth, Stanford UniverSity, personal cori=tirucation, Oc-

tober 1983.

Chapter 9

International Support forProgrammable Automation

ContentsPage

Summary 337

Introduction 338

Japan 340Direct Government Role 340Government Support to Industry 343

Vest. Germany 346Direct Government Role 346Government Support to Industry 348

Sweden 350Direct. Gov--rnment Role 350Governor nt Support to Industry 350

France 352Filiere Robotique 353Fi liere Electronique 354implementation of the Filieres Electronique and Robotique 355

United Kingdom 356Direct Government Role 356Government Support to Inaustry 357

Other Countries 359Norway 359Canada 360Italy 362The Netherlands 362

TablesTable No. Page

73. Government-Sponsored R&D Projects on Robotics in Japan 34674. Budget of the BMFT 349

FiguresFigure No. Page

39; European Executives Pick Technological Leaders 33940: Long-Range Trends in Japanese Exports and Imports 34141: Government/University Shares of R&D Funds and Expenditures 345

Chapter 9

International Support forProgrammable Automation

SummaryMany of the industrialized nations support

the development of programmable automation(PA) to some extent. The degree to which suchsupport has been effective is not easy to de-termine. It is confounded by other factors, in-cluding technological sophistication; industrycharacteristics, and cultural4ifferences. How-ever; the efforts which seem to be most suc-cessful are those which conform to and buildon existing social and economic traditions.

The Japanese Government, mainly throughthe activities of its Ministry of InternationalTrade and Industry (MITI), has developedlong-range plans for economic growth, produc-tivity growth, and e:zport competitiveness.The most notable contribution of MITI hasbeen to encourage the diffusion of PA technol-ogies to small and medium-sized fun's. In thisway MITI has also stimulated low-cost, massproduction of the low-end products of the PAmarket. This has helped Japanese producersbecome strong competitors in the internation-al PA market.

Since the mid-1970's, West Germany hasbeen committed to enhancing the internationalcompetitiveness of the advanced technologysectors of its economy through strong supportof research and development (R&D). The Min-istry for Research and Technology (BMFT) isthe lead agency for coordinating_ science andtechnology policy with overall macroeconomicpolicy goals. BMFT has established_ an Ad-vanced Manufacturing Technologies Programin order to promote the_riskier types of inno-vation in this sector. The government hasplaced a strong emphasis on developing anunderstanding of the ways in which PA willaffect the workplace and the labor force.

In the 1980's, the Swedish Governmentbegan to devote more resources to long-termresearch in PA in the hopes of bolsteringSwedish economic growth. The Swedes are al-ready significant robot producers. The Gov-ernment also has a strong interest in educa-tion mid retraining, which is consistent withits traditionEdly strong manpower policies.

The French Government under Mitterrandhas made a strong commitment to speedingup the development and diffusion of PA, inpart to enhance competiiiveness. Japan andSweden have set up robot manufacturing fa-cilities in France ae/part of a Governinentstrategy for technology transfer. The FrenchGovernment has also shown concern for thehuman impacts of the implementation of PA.

The Department of Industry and Trade inthe United Kingdom has a set of "schemes"to-promote capital investments in PA. Todate, however, these schemes have not beennotably successful in promoting the diffusionof PA in Great Britain. The GovernMent re-

-centlk7et_up a national advanced technologyresearch program to support R&D in PA in-dustries, among others.

Norway has no extensive Government pro-grams to encourage PA, although its produc-tion and application are progressing. The Gov-ernment is itrging the developnient a newtechnologies to promote industrial expansion.It has also identified key social impacts thatthe transition to advanced technology indus-tries is having on the labor force.

The Canadian Government is playing a largerole in encouraging the development and im-plementation of PA. It has developed model

337

338 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment; Education, and the Workplace

programs for Government investment strat-egies and for encouraging labor-managementcooperation in dealing with dislocation,_re-training, and work environment issuesz Theprograms are new and the development effortstarts from a relatively modest base.

Italy is a significant producer and exporterof machine tools and industrial robots. Somepredict that Italy may also become one of thetop five producers of industrial robots by the1990's.

IntroductionTechnological change and evolving patterns

of international trade have focused attentionon government policies relative to PA and ontheir potential effects on the development ofmanufacturing sectors among nations. Thischapter describes policies and programsabroad which are directed at the developmentand use of PA; focusing on countries most ac-tively engaged in PA production and use.*While other chapters discuss internationalcomparisons in specific areas; this chapter pro-vides complementary - descriptions of majorforeign government programs.

In each country discussed here, PA tech-nologies can be found in different phases of de-velopment and adoption. The rate of adoptiondepends on the nature of each country'smanufacturing sector; the availability of ap-propriately skilled labor; the nature of publicand private research efforts; and such factorsas capital availability; awareness of the tech-nologies and their capabilities, and govern-ment incentives to encourage implementation.

Industrialized nations have different tradi-tions of government involvement in technol-ogy and industry development. The distinctivecultural; social; political; and economic char-acteristics of each nation shape its policies.The course of development among national

*Note that reliable and useful information on support for anduse of PA in Eastern bloc countries is virtually nonexistent.Hence, these countries are not included in this analysis. In ad-dition. other countries not covered here, including many in theThird World, also produce and use PA to a limited extent. Forexample, the use of CAD systems for mapping applications isgrowing in less developed countries.

35,4

manufacturing sectors also varies, dependingon the size of the econom3ri; the nature of thelocal capital market, the extent to which theeconomy depends on exports, and the flexibil-ity of the labor market. Ilese national differ-ences make it difficultip measure and com-pare the effects that macroeconomic andmacroeconomic policies have on a country'scompetitive advantage in international trade,its industrialmix, and its employment profile.International differences also militate againstthe direct transplantation of foreign programsto other countries. Finally, the availability ofinformation about/foreign support for PA isvery uneven, and the timeliness and accuracyof that informatiOn is a recurring problem forinternational comparisons regarding PA. Never-theless, this discussion is offered for il-lustrative purposes and to provide a measureof the level of foreign government interest inPA.

Industrial and technological developmentabroad appear to reflect less the dollar amountof government support than the nature ofgovernment programs and their relation to ex-isting political, economic, and social condi-tions. It is not clear that current PA R &D pro-grams in the United Kingdom and France, forexample, have been notably successful. The di-mate for research and the mechanisms for as-suring that research results are disseminatedto industry in those countries may not be asfavorable as in the United States. For exam-ple, the mobility of researchers between indus-try and universities appears to be greater inthe United States. Moreover, Europeans arecurrently concerned that loss of their top scien-

Ch. 9International Support for Programmable Automation 339

tit to the United States may diminish theirprospects for economic growth ;'

A group of more than 200 European corpo-rate chief executives recently surveyed by theWall Street Journal "believe their continenthas declined as a source of technology leader-ship; with the U.S. maintaining its top posi-tion and Japan gaining in importance: "2 Fig-ure 39 shows how the executives rateddifferent nations in technological leadership;The perceived losses in technological leader-ship by European countries particularlyWest Germany and the United Kingdom are

'Diane L. Coutu, "European Nations Fret Over MountingLosses of Scientists to the U.S.," The Wall Street Journal; Oct.21, 1983.

Huey; "Executives Assess Europe's Technology Decline,"The Wall Street Journal, Feb. 1, 1984, p. 28. The Journal, Booz-Allen & liamiltorZinc., and HR&H Marketing Researchternational of London selected the executives from the top 1;000companies in Europe ranked by revenue. Thejeurnal's coverageis based on responses to the survey; Booz-Allen's analysis, andthe work of the Journal's reporting staff. The Journal writes:"The survey isn't intended -to be statistically rigorous; but itrepresents probably the most_ comprehensive current strrvey ofexecutive attitudea regarding the technology on a pan-Europeanand multi-itidustfy scale."

striking. The explanations offered by the ex-ecutives surveyed include a lack of trained per-sonnel for developing and introducing newtechnology; relatively low status for tech-nology issues and technical personnel withincorporations; and a strong conservatismamong European businessmen. These factorsresult in part in an emphasis on technologyfor-cost reduction,-as-opposed-to innovation--as a source of new products, improved prod-uct performance, or improved customer serv-ice. It is interesting to note that most of theproblems cited_by European executives havealso been cited in similar studies in the UnitedStates.' According to the .1611172111 survey,_Eu-ropean executives apparently balieve that U.S.corporations are responding to those problemsmore effectively than they are thamSelveS,spite domestic criticism of U.S. industry andpolicies.

'See; for example; It H. Hayes and W. J. Abernathy, "Manag-ing Our Way To Economic Detline," IferVerd Bueinehe Review,July-August 1980, pp. 67-77; R. G. Shaeffer and A. R. Janger,The Conference Board, "Who is Top Management?" report No.821, 1982, as well as other Conference Board reports;

Figure 39.European Executives Pick Technological Leaders° (percent)0)a)

In the past

Today and in the future

aRespondents could choose more than one country

SOURCE! rheMll_Street Journal and EloozAllen & Hamilton, Inc., survey of more than 200 chief executives of corporations in 16 foreigncountries as reported In The Wail Street Journal, Fee. 1, 1984, p. 28.

355

340 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

On the other hand, European countries tendto focus more attention, political support, andresearch on theluman aspects of automationthan does the United States. Attention to so-cial issues related to PA parallels traditionsin many countries of strong programs for em-ployment security and training and prominentrepresentation of labor groups in the politicalarena. Concern abroad for the employment ef-fects of PA is high and likely to grow in lightof the relatively low rates of job creation inmany European countries and the labor dis-placement potential commonly associated

Direct Government Role

with PA. Recent analyses by the Organizationfor Economic Cooperation and Development,for example, concluded that the United Stateshad created 22.5 million new jobs since 1980,while industrial employment in Western Eu-rope fell by 1.5 million in the same period.4

The following sections describe policies andprograms in each country related to both thesocial and technical aspects of PA.

'Paul Lewis,"Nations Seek Key to Growth," The New YorkTimes; Feb. 15, 1984.

witt,

Japan

\Given Japan's scarcity of indigenous natu-ral resources and its reliance on other nationsfor imP'orts of food, energy, and raw materi-als, the [Japanese strive to maintain a high vol-ume of exports. Thus, international competi-tiveness and the ability to sell abroad is ofcrucial importance to the Japanese economy.Over the last decade Japanese firms havemade a concerted effort to increase exportsales in manufacturing industries.5 Fgure 40demonstrates how the character of Japaneseexports and imports has changed dramaticallyin the past few decades;-- partly as a result ofthe stewardship of MITI.

Since the Meiji Restoration in 1868, therehas been a tradition of Government-industrycooperation, and the Government has histor-ically been able to intervene effectively in theeconomy. Thus, industry has traditionally

_tended _to view Government its a partner; rath-er than as an adversary or regulator. In recentyears; however; this cooperative relationshiphas appeared to break down to some extent,as evidenced by the ebbing role of the Ministryof International Trade and Industry (MITI).

°Japanese Ministry of Internation _Trade and -Industry;"White Paper on International Trade," September 1982, p. 50.

3

MITI was organized in the late 1940's fromthe Commerce and Industry Ministry, and itsname reflected a new emphasis on internation-al trade. While the agency has less-independ-ent power than is commonly ascribed in theUnited States; MITI works closely with indus-try associations and other Government agen-cies. For example, a standarti_practice is fora former official from the MITI staff to jointhe staff of an industry association and act asa liaison. The agency sets broad industrial pol-icy, collects information on relevant researchin other countries, and promotes special stud-ies where information is lacking. The observa-tion that MITI's role may bt decreasing seemsto be based on two major trends: First, theagency played a major role in allocating scarcecapital in the postwar period, while capitalshortages are now much less severe. Second,many Japanese industries (automobiles, forexample) have become very strong; hence,they require less aid and resist MITI's in-volvement.

The Japanese Government has encouragedthe movement of people and resources into sec-tors with a potential for high growth and highproductivity. Japan's long-term economicplans call for reducing the importance of thecountry's agricultural and manufacturing sec-tors, and expanding the economic role of the

001

)rt

;ottonrod ucts---.:ottonbre

Others

Tea

Silk

1868-72

Others

Fbods

Figure 4O. Long -Range Trends in Jan 3nese Exports and Imports

Coal andcopper

-Madhiny

Silk

Cotton andtextilerod ucts

1908-12

Others Machinery_

Ste-.41

TektileS

--Machinery

OthersOthers

..Chemicals

Machinery

Silk

1930-34 1948

Machinery.4zroirieeals

Oil andcoal

Foods

Cottonfibre

Steeland metalproducts

1960

Textiles

1970 1980

Others

Foods

Machinery

metalsWoodand othermaterials

OilFetid

1868-7.2 1908.12 1930-34 1948

Long,Range Strateric Planning m .1.roanette R and D." Futures. October 1983. p 337

35?

1960 1970

Oil

Foods

1980

ElectronicsproductsShipsCars

Steel

Machinery111lirieralSWood

342 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

less energy-consuming, knowledge-intensiveservice sectors. MITI sees this as following along-term trend which is already evident in theUnited States. It encourages this shift by pro-moting productivity and quality control gainsand reductions in labor, energy. and materialscosts. PA is one means toward these ends.

Government MechanismsIndustries currently targeted for develop-

ment by the Government in Japan includecomputers, microelectronics and electronics,

_:_lasers, fiber optics, biotechnology, robotics,aerospace, and teleconununications.° The in-struments of industrial development policyinclude:

Visions.-These are Government-sponsoredpapers elaborating on current economicchallenges facing Japan, and discussingstrategies to meet these challenges. MITIwrites these documents in collaborationwith industry, labor, and political interestgroups.' The visions are intended to aidbusiness and Government agencies instrategic pia/ming.Government Assistance. The JapaneseGovernment provides small amounts offinancial support for R&D in private firmsin order to serve as "a catalyst to stimu-late private sector support of mutuallyagreed upon industrial development pol-icy goals."8 In general, the role of Japa-nese universities in research is much lesssignificant than the role of industry; andmuch less prominent than that of theircounterparts in the United States:Rationalization carte-Th.-Lin , the late1960'i; in order to promote the develop-ment of internationally competitive firmsin Japan; MITI guided the restructuring

'Harold B. Main and Jack Baranson, Techncrogy andTrade Policy: Issues and An Agenda for Action, Washington,D.C..: October 1981; and Cabinet Council on Commerce and

_._Trade, An Assessment at U.S Competitiveness in High Tech-nology Industries, U.S. Department of Commerce, IT& Feb-ruary_1983.

'Jimmy Wheeler; Merit Janow, and Thomas Pepper,Japa-nese IndustrieDevelopment Policies in the 1980's: Implica-tions for U.S. Trade and Investment (New Fork: Hudson In-stitute for the U.S. Department of State, Oct-ober 1982).

'Ibid.

3 5

of Japanese industry by encouraging cor-porate mergers. (An increase in the num-ber of new enterprises in Japan through-out the 1960's had resulted in strongdomestic competition and a destabiliza-tion of Japanese industrial activity.)There continues to be a high level of merg-er activity toward the ends of enhancingmanagement, maximizing the use ofR&D, and facilitating the movement ofcapital among activities. Merger's are also,motivated by the costs for large-scale in-vestments in R&D and equipment° It hasrecently been observed that companiesare beginning to resist MITI-encouragedmergers as domestic Competition inhigh-technology industries increases.Tax Incentives.--Special depreciationallowances exist for designated plant andequipment, in order to encourage devel-opment of targeted industries.Monetary Policies. Throughout thepostwar period, up until the early 1970's,the Japanese rationed credit. The Bankof Japan controlled the discount rate toinfluence microeconomic decisions.1`Typ-ically, this ability was used to bias flowstoward investment in productive infra-structure and capital-intensive manufac-turing and away from consumer spend-ing, housing and social infrastructure.'"This control eroded in the 1970's as Japanjoined the International Monetary Fund(IMF) and the Organization for EconomicCooperation and Development (OECD),and its capital market bedame more inter-nationalized for a number of reasons.

;

Government Concern for Social Impactsof Technological Change

The Japanese Government has strong con-cerns about the social impacts of increased ap-plication of PA and other new technologies inthe manufacturing sector. The Japanese Min-istry of Labor released a report in May 1983

`MIT Center for Policy Alternatives,National Sup?ort formrid 7beimology: An Examination of Foreign Exchange,

1976.'°Wheeler, a al.. op. cit., p. 7.

Ch. 9International Support for Programmable Automation 343

entitled. :MicrOelctitiiii-e-s and Its Impact onLabor."The report focuses on the employmenteffects of robots and iiiiercielectrcinie Prodtiet§and protesses in Japanese firms. Iii.reSponseto the employment effects of pro-duction technologies in JapplieSe industry,- theMinistry of Labor has requested funds for theestablishnient of 13t "policy department"the ministry, This department would monitoremployment trends and allow the ministry todevelop recommendations which would be con-§idered in the development of national ncanom-ic policy."

Government Support to IndustryThe Machine Tool Industry

A fundamental difference in the approachof the United States and Japan toward sup-part of the machine tool industry is that U.S.programs havasieveloped machine-tool tech-nology for military prOduCtion purposes, whilethe Japanese Government encouraged broadindustrial application of new machinc-tooltechnology." The Japanese approach includedgovernment-funded research institutes, whichallowed Japanese firms to spend less on R&Dthan private U.S. firms generally considerednecessary: Japanese research institutions wereparticularly responsive to the suggestions andexperience of commercial end-users of the tech-nology.' 3 .

Japanese competitiveness iii the low end ofthe world machi tool market reflects thewidespread tip0c tion of the technology inthe domestic omy.-The Japanese Gcivern=ment provided technical 'information and as-sistance to small and medium-sized firms toencourage the application of machine-tooltechnology in industrial production. Govern-

"U.S. Embassy; Tokyo. Japan, unpublished summary of Jap-anese NIirustry of Labor Report cm Microelectronics and Its Im-pact on Labor, Aug 5, 1983.

"See National Machine Tool Builders' Association, petitionto the U.S. Department of Commerce under the NationWcurity_Clause for _adjustment of imports of machine tools, Mar.10, 1983; and the response from the Japan Machine ToolBailders' Association, June 27, 1983.

"National Academy of Engineering The Competitive Statusof the Machine Tool Industry (Washington; D.C.: NationalAcademy Press; 1983); 0. 31.

- - /1 rT I

ment-sponsored technical centers provided-cost-benefit estimates, customized software;and training to firms interested in numericallycontrolled (NC) machines. By reducing useruncertainty and costs, the Japanese have beenable to develop both domestic and internation-al markets for small NC machine tools."

The Robot IndustryThe Japan Industrial Robot Association.

!rx 1971, the Industrial Robot R,ofmdtable wasestablished; this was a precursor to the JapanIndustrial Robot Association (gIZRA Formedin 1972, JIRA was initially a Government cor-poration financed_ by the proceeds of sportsevents sponsored by the machinery industry.In 1978, JIRA becaine zn incorporated privateassociation. This configuration allows MITIto deal with robot producers as a group. One-third of Japanese robot producers- belong toJIRA, as do many Japanese and foreign ro-bot users." JIRA's function is to promote thedevelopment of the robot industry throughmarket surveys, the monitoring of technolog-ical ae.ranccu, public relations, and develop-ment of new applications for robot systems.JIRA has been much more advanced in thecollection and dissemination of informationabout robots and their uses than the associa-tion's counterpart in the United States, theRobotic Industries Association (RIA, formerlythe Robot Institute of America). However,RIA is moving to bolster its informationgathering and dissemination capabilities.

Japan Robot Leasing Co.MITI has pro-mdfiki the development and application of ro-bot technology as one means of pursuing itsoverall strategies; However, the Japanese ro-bot industry received little Government assist-ance until the late 1970's; In April 1980, MITIencouraged the establishment; of the JapanRohOt Leasing Co, (JAROL), JAROL was es-tablished in order to promote the use of indus-trial robots tluoughout the Japanese.. economy:The company leases robots primarily (90 per-

"Industry and Trade Strategies; unpublished contractor re-port for OTA.

"U.S. General Accounting Office, Industrial Policy: CaseStudies in the Japanese Experience, Oct. 20, 1982.

3 5

344 - Computerized Manufacturing AutOmatton: EmplOyment, Educabon; and the Workplacer

cent) to small and medium-sizedriterprises.JAROL is joirftly owned by 24 major robotproducer§ and 10 life -insurance companies.The company initially r&ce,:ved no Governmentfunding, but now Teeth/08 60 percent of its fi-nancing from the Japan Development Bankin theforM of lbw intert loans. The remain-ing 40 percent of JAROL financing comesfrom the Long=Term Credit Bank, the Indus-trial Bank of Japan, and various city banks.These favorable capital rates allow JAROL tolease robots at Inore favorable rates than or-dinary leasing companies can offer; Neverthe-less, other leasing companies and large robotvendors have also offered leaiies to robot users.JAROL received approval to extend leasingto companies abroad in the spring of 1983)6

IncentiVes.=MITI has also en-couraged the deVelOpment of several fiscal andfinancial incentives to promote robot installa-tfon. LOW interest loans are provided to smalland medium-sized enterprises through theSmalliMedium Business Finance Corp; (Chus-ho Kigyo Kinyo Koko) and the Nationalnance Corp. In addition; interest-free loans ofup to 12 million yen ($51,000 *) are providedby the Government to small and medium-sizedenterprises for the modernization of Manufac-turing facilities." In order to promote robotapplications for dangerous jobs, loans areavailable at 8 percent interest for the first 3years and 8.3 percent for the remaining life ofthe loan; The Government budgeted 5.8 bil-lion yen ($24.8 rhillidn) fOr these loans in 1980.In addition to ordinary depreciations, a specialdepreciatidn allowance was established inApril 1980 for those firms installing industrial

"'Paul Aron, The Robot Scene in Japan: An Update, Reportit26, DaiWri Securities America, Inc , September 1983.

Throughout this OTA report, foreign currency amountsareconverted to their U.S. equivalent ueing foreign exchange ratesin New York on Feb. 1. 1984, as cited in The Wall Street -.-kir-r,W, Feb. 2; 1984. Because the dollar was extraordinarily strongCompared to foreign currencies at that time,_the U.S. dollarequivalents given ih this report are lower than they would beunder more typica foreign exchange conditions: For reference,the exchange rates used are $1 =234.25 Japanese Yen,_0.7089British Pounds, 1.2473 Canadian Dollars, 8.5425 French Francs,7.853 Norwegian Krone; 8.1425 Swedish Krona, and 2.7925West German Marla

"William Rapp, CommerCial Counselor, -U.S. Embassy; Tok-yo, personal communication, October 1983.

robots; A manufacturer who installs robots ispermitted to depreciate 12.5_percent of theoriginal purchase price in the first year, in,ad-dition to ordinary depreciation allowances.This may allow a firm to depreciate its robotsas much as 52.5 percent during the first year.The depreciation rate was lowered to 10 per-cent for 1984 and 1985; the program is dueto__expire in 1985, though it may be renewed."

Research and DevelopmentIn 1977, Japanese industry provided 65.7

percent of R&D funds-in Japan; while the GOV-ernment provided 16.1 percent and universi-ties and other groups provided the remaining18.2 percent; By contrast; in the UnitedStates; industry provided 43.8 percent, GOV=ernment 51.1 percent; and universities 5.1 per=cent; In the Federal Republic of Germany, in=dustry provided 55.6 percent, Government41.5 percent, and 2.9 percent came from for=eigners" (see fig. 41).

The Japanese Government, like the UnitedStates and European govermne. ,s, is modeSt-ly subsidizing R&D projects on robotics (table72). MITI's Agency of Industrial Science andTechnology has two laboratories in which aconsiderable amount of research on robotic§is carried outthe ElectrTechnical Labora-tory and the Mechanical Engineering Labor-atory. MITI has also developed cooperativeprojects among competitive robot manufac-turers, who contribute researchers to the jointefforts. Public research has focused on theo-reticalproblems that also tend to be relevantto applications =speed control; - improved posi-tioning accuracy, simplification and modular-ization of robots, sensory perception, andpat-tern recognition ability. These joint researchefforts have sought to avoid duplication of re-search efforts by the producer firms. In addi-tion, MITI, in conjunction with JIRA, spon-

"GAO Industrial POlicy Case Studies, op, cit., pp. 25.27; andPaul Aron, Daiwa Securities America, Inc., "Rlbots Revisited:One Year Later," Report #25,_July 28, 1981, p.' I6 as reprinted._in OTA Commissioned Background Papers to the ExploratoryWorkShap on the Social Impacts of Robotics; February 1982.

"'Science and Te7chriblogy White Paper '81 Released," Sci-ence and Technology in Japan, January 19132, p. 9.

Ch. 9-lntomational Support for Programmable Automation 345

Figure 41.--/Government/Industry/University Shares of R&D Funds and Expenditures

_apan(1977) {

United States /(1977)

West Germany(1977)

France(1977)

Funds

Expenditure

Funot:

Expenditure

Funds _

Expenditure

Funds

Expenditure

Funds

United Kingdom{(1975).

Expenditure

1

Industry 65.7

(Unit %)'.Government

16.1 (27.4} -Universities, etc.18.2

Industry 65.2(1.9% of Industry)

Industry 438 _

13.1 21.7Government Universities, etc.

Universities; etc.GovernmenL5i.1

Industry 66.8 15.3(353% of industry) Government

Industry 55.6

17.9Universities; etc:

Government, etc.Foreign 2.9 41.5

0

Industry 68.4 15:2 16.4(15:8% of industry) . Government Universities, etc.

Government Universities; etc:37.7 (52.7) 15:7

Foreign 5.6Industry 41.1

Industry 60.3-(25.3% of industry)

Industry 40.8

jForeign

4.9

PI/

Government51.7

16.9Universities, etc.

Industry 62.7(30.9% of industry)

SOURCE Scoenco and Technology In Japan. January 1982. p. 9

10.8Universities, etc.

346 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

Project

Table 73.=Government-Sponsticed R&D Projects on Robotics in Japan1

Period Sponsors

Industrial Robots Standardization Project 1974-81

Research Assembly Work 1976.78Research Project on System Design in ComputerAssisted

Robot System Engineering 1976Laser Based Flexible Manufacturing System Technology

Research Project ...........................,.. 1977-84Development & Research Project of Multiple Production

System Adapting Super-High Lasers 1978-83Research Project on Robot 'zing Cast Finishing Work . 1978-83Research Project on Automatic & Extemal ASSeMbly of_ High-Rise_Buildings ................. 1978TeChnology Assessment of Industrial Robots 1980

AIST/MITIaJapan Small Auto Promotion Association

Japan MachinE .duStrial AssociatiOn

MITI

AISTSmall Business Corporation

Japan Machine AssociationJapan Industrial Technology Promotion

Association

aAIST Agency of Industrial Science and TeChnolody; MITIMlnIstry of International Trade and Industry.SOURCE VVilkam Rapp, Commercial Counselor. U.S. Embassy, Tokyo, personal communication. Oct 13. 1983.

sors the wide dissemination of resultingresearch data."

Beginthrig in April 1982, MI'r I was to carryout a 7-year, 30 billion yen ($128 million) ro-bot research program. It was intended to de-velop fobots suitable for wider application, aswell as to develop indigenous Japanese robottecanology in order to reduce reliance onAmerican and Western. European innovations.The program was postponed f(,r a time due tobudgetary constraints, but work began in fis-cal year 1983, and is still expected to be car-ried out over the envisioned 7-year period withfull funding.21

Another of Japan's largetcale technologydevelopment schemes involves "developingcomplex production Systems in which mechan-ical components for small -batch production ofdiversified products can be flfxibly and rapid-ly produced from metallic materials in an in-tegrated system."22 Under this scheme MITI

"Paul Aron, Report #25, op. cit., p. 17; and Paul Aron, Re-port #26, op. ciL, pp. 26,27.

"Paul Aron, Report #26, op. cit."GAO Industrial Policy Case Studies, op. cit., p; 9;

provided 20 percent [13 billion yen ($55.5 mil-lion) over fiscal years 1977-831 of_the fundingfor the development of a Flexible Manufactur-ing Complex Utilizing Lasers. 23 The programdid not finial' on schedule, and was extendedthrough 1984 With an extra 1 billion yen ($4.3million). 24 The project had to be scaled downbecause extensive reliance on one large laserdid not prove practicaL_The program has sinceincorporated more conventional applications.These applications, however, are not beingused widely in the commercial sector for tech-nical reasons. The project has become some-thing of a "showcase" for advanced Japanesetechnology. Other projects aiming at comput-erized manufacturing integration are alsounderway in Japan, building on machine tool,robot, and computer research efforts.

"U.S. Departinetic of Conunerce, International Trade Admin-istration, High TeChnolcigy Industries: Profiles and Outlooks,The Robotics Industry, April 1983, 0. 25. _

"Federal BroPAcast Information Service and GAO IndustrialPolicy Case Studies; op. cit., p. 28.

West GermanyDirect Government Role

Government expenditures as a percentageof gross national product in West Germanyare relatively high compar&I to other Europe.

362

an nations. The country has a highly devel-oped social welfare valt m providing generoushealth, unempthyment,_ and social securitybenefits; the system also permits a degree ofworker participation in business manage-

Ch. 9-1nternational Support for Programmable Automation 347

ment." However, West Germany has nosharply defined industrial policy. It is similarto the United States in that Government sup-Part for industry is more or less decentralized,and there is substantial support at the Statelevel. The Lander (States) can give housinggrants to workers; grant land, and providecredit guarantees to attract new industries orpreserve old ones."

Since the oil crises_of_the_197_0!e,_GOvern=ment intervention in the German economy hasincreased in the form of direct subsidies, taxrelief, special depreciation allowances, andpreferential interest rates. The Governmentguarantees risk-capital loans to private busi-ness through Risk Financing Associations,which are made up of private banks. The Deut-sChe_Wagnis Finanzierungs Gesellschaft(DWFG), farmed in 1975; is a financing con-sortium owned by 28 large_ commercial banksand backed by the Federal Government to pro-vide venture capital in the FRG," The Govern-ment has also developed fiscal policy incen-tives to promote innovation, as well as aninformatiOn network on new patents to ensurethat they are effectively applied.

The Government provides over 90 percentof total R&D spending in Germany; althoughit provides only limited direction for research;The Ministry of Research and Technology(Bund,.:sministerium fur Forschung and Tech-nologie, BMFT) is the coordinating agencyfor technology policy and the major providerof R&D funds. BMFT is concerned With gen-eral macroeconomic policy, promotion of inno-vation, and the health of small and medium-sized businesses. The 'Science Council, orWissenschafistrat, determines the objectivesand priorities of R&D policy and makes budg-et allocations and recommendations. TheCouncil is comprised of a board of experts

"MIT Center for Policy Alternatives, National Support forScience and TeChnology: An Examination of Foreign Exchange,1976.

"Wolfgang Hager, National Industrial Strategies and theWorld Economy, William Diebold and John Pinder(eds.), Atlan-tic Institute for International Affairs, Research geries, vol. 6,1982, p. 241.

""Venture Capita' Struggles to Get Off the Ground." Finan-cial Times of London, Feb. 11, 1983, p. lc.

from the Government [troth the Bund (Federal)and Lander (State)], academia, industry, andthe German research institutes. Although therecommendations of the Council are not bind-ing, they carry considerable-influence. The--Wissenschaftstrat embodies the emphasisthat German society places on scientific en-deavors."

Government Concern for the Social Impactsof Technological Change

Government-labor-industry relations in re-gard to encouraging and adapting to technol-ogical change are particularly good in WestGermany. A well-developed communicationnetwork has been created between industryand Government through "quasi-public, semi-autonomous" research institutes and a systemof advisory councils." The foundation for con-certed action between labor unions and em-ployers' associations on the one hand, and Fed-eral, State, and local government officials onthe other, was established in 1966 with theStability and Growth Act. Regular consulta-tion between Government ministers and laborunion officials on matters concerning indus-trial policy, income policy, and internationalcompetition and trade policy has evoked a so-cial consensus." The potential social impactsof technological change iparticularly thosethat may take place within the workplace)have been part _ of the political agenda.Througho& the 1970's, following the GermanSocial Democratic party's rise to power, alarge number of occupational safety andhealth measures were enacted by the FederalRepublic of Germany. See chapter 5 for a moredetailed discussion of relevant legislation andthe Humanization of Work Program, which isa central feature of Government action to ad-dress the social impacts of technologicalchange.

"Margrigreri, op. cit.; and Massachusetts Institute of Tech-nology, op. cit., pp. 14-23.

"Malmgren, op. cit., p. 39.wInternational Trade , Industrial Policieg, and the Future of

American Industry; The Labor Industry Coalition for Interna-tional Trade; April 1983; p. 30.

363

348 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, EdUcati On, and the Workplace-------

Government Support to IndustryGovernment Commitment to Smalland Medium-Sized Firms

In the late 1970's, the Federal Republic ofGermany initiated a number of programs topromote research, development; and innova-tion in small and medium-sized enterprises;The directing of technology policy towardthese companies represents a growing aware-ness in the West German Government of theimportance of such firms for innovation,growth, and emplOyment.31 These program in-clude funding for scientific and teChiiidal Per.:sonnel, external contract research, and innova=tion consultancy;

Direet\ Support of small and medium-sizedenterprises by the BMFT has n rising; Thisreflects expansion of BMFT programs to in-clude electrbnies, computer applications, andhuthanization of the working environment; Inaddition, the BMFT has increased its effortsto make smaller firms more aware of the Gov-ernrnent support available to them; The Miri-istry for Economic Affairs (Bundesminister.7rum fur Wirtschaft, or BMWi) assists smalland medium-sized firms indirectly by Support=ing theFederation of Industrial CooperativeResearch Associations (ArbeitsgemeinschaftIndustrieller Forachungsvereinigurigen, orAIF). AIF consists of more than 80 individualresearch associations which aid the smallerfirms through publicity, research seminars,and technical adiriaorY SerViceS. Another pro-.gram adiniiiistered by BMWi provides subsi-dies for 30 percent of the total cost [up toDM120,000 ($43,000)] of contract researchplaced by a small Or medium -sized firm witha public or private research institution. Theprogram i6 funded, however, by BMFT.32

The large-at current program designed tosupport small and mecuum-sized firing is the"Program of Grants Towards the Costs ofR&D Personnel." The program is adminis-

3' I mpacts_of Government Incentives Towards Industrial In-novation," Meyer-Krahiner, Gielow and Kuntze. Research Pol-

icy, June 1983. pp. 153-154."OECD. Innovation in Small and Medium EriterpriseS, Pans,

1970, p; 133;

tered by AIF on behalf of BMWi. It offersgrants of 25 percent of gross wages and_sala-ries, and 40 percent of the expenses of R&Dpersonne1.33 This program provided DM1.1Hein ($394 million) to West German industrybetween 1981 and 1983; Its objective is to bur:ture industrial innovation by providing Sub=sillies for scientific and techniCal personnel.BMFT also provides free innovation counsel-ing to small and mediuM-siied firinS iii sever-al offices throughout the country In addition,there is a Technology Center in Berlin whichis linked to the German Engineers Association(VDI) to promote the diffifsion of technology.This center provides inforniatitm on the adop-tion of microelectronics and other technolo-gies; assists firms in applying for R&D sup-port from Federal agencies, and carries outstudies on new technologies."

Research and DevelopmentThe Ministry of Research and Technology

(BMFT).The Ministry supporta approxi-mately 6;000 projects in the forrn of grants toresearch societies such as the Max Planck orFraunhofer institutes, national laboratories,and individual research group§ in universitiesand industry. The 1983 budget breakdown is-shown in table 73. It is expected that R&Dfunding will increase for biotechnology, infor-mation science, microelectronics, robotics, en-vironmental protection, climatology, and pub-lic health."

In 1980, BMFT established a program,called "Fertigungstechnik," which supportsthe development of advanced manufacturingtechnologies. The program is directed at R&Defforts in small and medium-sized firms in or-der to provide a high level of technologicalcapacity in West Germany. In particular, itprovides Government funda for_ risky R&Dprojects with high innovative potentia1.36 The

"Lcbor Industry Coalition. op. cit.; and Dietmar Frenzel,Counselor; Science and Technology, Embassy of the FederalRepublic of Germany; personal communication; Feb. 23.1984.

"OECD, op. cit."U.S. Cable Traffic, Amerieari Enibessy. Bonn, June 27.1963;

Robert Morris; Counselor for Scientific & Technological Affairs

Ch. 9International Support for Programmable Automation 349

Table 74.Budget of the BMFTa

Category of _experiditiire Mi IlibriS of dollars,General (societies and institutes) $ 217Science and technology research 578Information technologies 243Energy 1;052Space; oceanography; transport -514

Total $2,634_U S dollars converted at $1 - OM 2.7915.

SOURCE RoOertMotos_,Counselor for Scientific and Technological Affairs, U.S.Embassy. Bonn. FRG.

program distributes funds in the form ofgrants or loans for private, basic R&D, andprivate or commercial R&D that includes workon the commercial application of existing tech-nologies. There is also Government-fundedR&D activity in Government facilities andState-owned firms aimed at developing newtechnologies; The program spent DM44.1 mil-lion ($15:79 Million) in 1980; and DM58.5 mil-lion ($20;95 million) in 1981, and planned sig-nificant increases for subsequent years. Dueto budget cuts; however; only DM45.7 million($16.37 Million) were available in 1982; andonly DM38.5 million ($13;79 million) in 1983.37

The Government is Also involved in moni-toring foreign technological developments, fos-tering Government-industry cooperation, es-tablishing national standards, providinginternational educational exchange programs,and export promotion:

West GermanNorwegian CollaborationThe Fraunhofer Institute for Production

Systems and Design Technology (IPK) andthree other West German industrial researchinstitutes have been involved in a joint Gov-ernment-sponsored research effort with the

"Robert Morris, U.S._Ernbassy, Bonn, FRG, personal com-munication, Aug. 4, 1983.

Norwegians for the last 2 years. The effortarose out of negotiations securing West Ger-man rights to drill for Norwegian oil, and itinvolves tecimical universities and industrialfirms in both countries. The Norwegians andWest Germans are developing an advancedproduction system (APS) for CAD_ applica-tions in mechanical engineering. APS wouldintegrate into a modular system existing pro-grams for geon,, trio modeling, NC machinetool programing, and process planning. Thelong-term goal is to develop a state of the art,computer-integrad manufacturing system tobe marketed by the firms involved. The pro-gram is built around an advanced geometricalmodeling system, which is designed to inter-face with all elements of a manufacturing sys-tem from design to assembly. APS is similarto the IPAD and ICAM projects being fundedby the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the- U.S. Department of De-fense (see ch. 8). The APS program, initiatedin 1981, had ELI initial joint funding commit-ment of $45 million."

R&D Tax CreditThe West Germans have instituted a special

tax credit to promote R&D. A 40 percent de-preciation allowance is granted for movableequipment utilized exclusively for R&D. A 15percent depreciation allowance is available forfixed plant equipment which is utilized two-thirds of the time for R &). Another 10_per-cent depreciation allowinice is available for theconstruction cost of buildings of which at leastone-third is devoted to R&D."

"Eugene Merchant, Metcut Associates, personal communi-cation; and American Metal Market/Metal Working News,"GAD/CAM Systems in Europe," Apr. 11, 1983.

"R. G. Morris, Counselor for Scientific and Technological Af-fairs, American Embassy, Bonn, personal communication, Aug.4, 1983.

350 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

Sweden

Direct Government RoleThe Swedish Government has traditionally

played_ a very strong role in the Swedish eon-orny. The Government owns 5 percent of Swe-dish industry; primarily in mining, public util-ities, transportation, and communications.40Exports and imports accounted for _an aver-age 30 percent share of GNP between 1975and 1980 in Sweden. Principal producers forexport include shipbuilding, mining; steel; andforest industries. Nearly half of all Swedish in-dugtrial products are sold abroad; while almostall of the Swedish energy supply is imported.Machinery and mechanical equipment alSomake up a large share of Swedish importS.Given Sweden's dependence on external trade,international competitiveness is vital to itseconomy.

In the 1970'S, Sweden was faced with seri-ous structural economic problems. With whatwas traditionally an export-led economy, thecountry began to encounter increased competi-tion in its major export markets. The oil priceincreases and high wage costs; combined withshrinking world demand and growing interns=tional competition; caused Sweden's major ex=pnrt sectors to deteriorate; The rise in valueof the Swedish Crown as a result of the Euro-

.peau Currency Tigreement also hint SskrediShexports; The most immediate aim of economicpolicy in Sweden today is to lower relativeprices of Swedish industrial goods on the worldmarket; to regain Swedish market shares in boththe export and domestic Markets.'

The Swedish Government recognizes thatproduction of PA equipment may be Stilite.gically desirable; and it is concerned about apossible shortage of skilled labbi. HiStbrically.Swedish Government outlays in support Of tictive manpower policies have been relativelyhigh; The Swedish "ActiVe LabOr Market"

'"The Swedish Inatitute, "Fact Sheets on Sweden;" September1980.

uSwedish Industry Up to 1990:_Analysis and Policy Propo-sals, National Industrial Board of Sweden, 1981 Autumn Re-port, pp. 84-85.

8 66

policy includes early and mandatory notifica-tion of plant closings, a virtual State moribrflo yon employment services, and extensive careercounseling and support for training pro-grams.42

Sweden's unique political and cultural con-text favors certain types of innovative pro-grams, while it makes comparisons of Govern-ment policy with other countries particularlydifficult.

Government Support to IndustryAccording to an official of the Royal Swed-

ish Academy of Engineering Sciences:The ability of Sweden to compete on the

world market for manufactured products willincreasingly depend on the ability and will-ingness of Swedish industrial firms to investin and use the new generation of manufactur-ing technologies."

The National Industrial Board has alsoStressed the need to promote structural eco-nomic change in Sweden in response tochanges in world markets and Sweden's dete=riorating competitiveness. It has recom=mended three major types of policy measures.The first promotes development of productionresources through investments-in technologydevelopment and acquisition of capital stockin sectors that arm expected to be competitivein the longterm. The second emphasizes selec-tion or targeting of those areas which are ex-pected_to,produce the highest yields in the fu-ture. Finally, the Board stresses that thedistribution of labor and capital in the produc-tion system may be strongly influenced by po-litical concerns.

"M. Benclick, Jr., "The Swedish 'Active Labor Market' Art.proach to Reemployingz Workers Dislocated by EconomicChange," The Urban Institute, Washington, D.C., March 1983.

"Hams Anderson; Project Manager, Royal Swedish Academyof Engineering Sciences; personal communication, May 19,1983.

Ch. 9International Support for Programmable Automation 357

The Swedish Committee on Labor MarketEducation and Training Within Industry

With respect to labor development, theSwedish Committee on Labor .1klarket Educa-tion and Training Within Indunt,.,;- IKAFU) iscurrently studying Swedish needs for skilledlabor. It is exploring whether or not the educa-tion and training system is supporting thosewith "a weak position in the labor market,"and whether or not the Goverrunent shouldtake action which would put personnel train-ing directly within companies. Despite the ac-tive manpower policies, unemployment is stillhigh, and there is some concern that Govern-ment-funded training programs are becomingjust a "holding pen" for otherwise unemployedworkers." The National Industrial Board isalso concerned about the supply of skilled la-bor and relevant Government responses.

The Swedish Commission on Computersand Electronics

In April 1981, the Swedish Commission onComputers and Electronics (Data-och Elek-tronikkornitten, or DEK) reported to theMin-ister of Industry on the promotion of PA inSweden. According to DEK, large opportuni-ties for improving productivity lie in:

. . . optimally interconnecting various proc-esses into computer-integrated manufactur-ing systems; In the engineering industries,and especially those subjected to strong in-ternational competition (automotive indus-try; computers and telecommunications, con-sumer electronics; household appliances,etc.), systems integration is regarded as thekey to survival in the 1989'S.45

CAD. The Swedish Government hasplaced a high priority on promoting the devel=opment of CAD. In 1982, DEK introthicednew legislation which included the allocationof 14 million Skr ($1.7 million) during 1982183in part for the formation of three CAD car=

"Bendick, op. cit."The Promotion of Robotics and CAD/CAM in Sweden, re-

port from the Computers and Electronics Commission; Ministryof Industry, LiberForlag, Stcxicholm. 1981, p. 1.

ters." A DEK report lists the following mo-tives for promoting the diffusion of these tech-nologies throughout the economy: 1) toincrease productivity and, thereby, profitabil-ity; 2) to improve the conditions of work; 3)to improve precision and tooling complexity;4) to acquire experience with new technologies;and 5) to reduce consumption of energy andraw materials..'

DEK recommended that the Swedish Gov-ernment coordinate activities promoting newproduction technologies,i and, in particular,that it promote long-term technology devel-opment and skills development at technicalfacilities. It recommended enlarging the voca-tional training program at the Swedish Insti-tute for Corporate Development (SIFU), andestablishing a training program for vocationalinstructors on computer-based productiontechnologies."

The Program for Diffusion of IndugtrialRobots and Computer Controlled ProductionTechniques. On April 1, 1983, DEK an-nounced the Program for Diffusion of Indus-trial Robots and CompUter Controlled Produc-tion Technique& In order to promote wider useof PA in small and Medium-sized firms thathave little or no farniliarity with PA, DEK pro-posed the following measures:

1. An information campaign revolvingaround the 14th Annual InternationalSymposium on Industrial Robots (ISIR),which will be held in Stockholm in Octo-ber 1984.

2. Support for production technology devel-opment projects.

3. Educational programs for project per-sonnel.

4. Development of a consultancy program.5. Regional educational programs which

--,----"Jan Carlsson, Computers and Electronics Commiaiion, in

a presentation at the IBM workshops: Automation in Manufac-turing: Effects on Productivity, Employment and Worklife;Jafallaplant, Stockholm, Mar. 30.31, 1982, p. 24.

°Computers_ and Electrordcs Commission Report on the Pro-motion of CAD/CAM in Sweden, op. cit., p. 18.

"Ibid.

36 /

352 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Etnployment, Education, and the Workplace

would include demonstration programs;including robot-assisted lathes and auto-mated materials handling, zobot weldingand automated materials handling, andflexible automated machine loading.

To further international recognition ofSwedish PA industries, ISIR will incluae vis-its to producer and user plants by foreign par-ticipants. DEK has also proposed a microelec-tronics campaign in Sweden. Finally, DEK hasconsidered establishing direct support for theSwedish PA industry based on Japanese andBritish models. Because it found problemswith establishing similar support mechanismsin Sweden; DER did not take a firm positionon this issue."

The Swedish Board for TechnicalDevelopment (STU)

The Swedish Board for Technical Develop-ment (STU) operates under the auspices of theSwedish Ministry of Industry, and providesfunding for advanced R&D in universities; re-search laboratories, and industry. Between1972 and 1979, STU funding for robotics and

"Telmikspridningsprogram For Inch,scrirobotar och Dator-suxid Produktionsteknik, IndustriDepartmentet, Data-ochelektronikkommitten, DSI 1933:6.

CAD amounted to approximately 25 millionSkr ($3.07 znillion).50

Total STU support for R&D in engineeringindustries is expected to increase considerably,to 260 million Skr ($3193 Million) for the pe-riod 1980/81-1984/85;5' Of this amount, 14 mil-lion Skr ($1.72 niilliOri) will go toward CADand CAM R&D. Long-term projects are alsoplanned for adaptive control of machine toolsand industrial robots, and a 10 million Skr($1;23 Million), 4-year CAD joint venture proj-ect is planned between Saab-Scania, STU, andtwo universities.52 Saab- Scania will eventuallyinvest about 3 Million Skr ($370,000) towardthe commercial development of this CAD 80system." STU and the Swedish Associationof Mechanical and Electrical Industries haveagreed to sponsor a 5-year CAD and CAM re-search program. Thei agreement calls for acommitment of 46 million Skr ($5.65 million)and 48 million Skr ($5.89 million); for STU andthe association, respectively,"

"Computers and Electronics Commission Report on the Pro-motion of CAD/CAM in Sweden, op. cit., p. 30.

"Carlsson, op. cit., p. 25."Ibid., and Computers and Electronics Commission Report

on the Promotion of CAD/CAM in Sweden, op. cit."Computers and Electronics Commission Report on the Pro-

motion of CAD/CAM in Sweden; op. cit., pp. 30 -31."Computersand Electronics Commission Report on the Pro-

motion of CAD/CAM in Sweden, op. cit., p. 31, and Caisson;op. cit., p. 25.

FranceThe French Government has traditionally

playedn large role in the coordination, fund-ing, and direction of theYrencheconomy sinceJean Baptiste Colbert founded the Academyof Sciences in 1666. French Governments sincehave, changed the scope and nature of that in-volvement but the traditional mechanismsused by Government have changed very little.

Since World War II; information_technolo-gy, including PA, has been of major inter:6-1sto the French Government and therefore to theFrench industrial and educational. communi-

36d

ties. Funding commitments, research, and in-dustrial production for information technolo-gies have been directed toward two majorgoals: 1) world recognition of France as aleading manufacturer of high technology prod-ucts, and 2) the development of informationtechnology-based systems and patterns ofcommunication which could help preserve anddevelop French culture and society.

Recently, France's high technology pushgained new strength. -The last French Presi-dential election (1981) marled the- first -time

I

Ch. 9international Support for Programmable Automation 353

science and technology was a political issue."Indeed, all candidates had indicated that in-creased funding for R&D was one of theirgoals. Before losing to Mr-. Mitterrand, Mr.d'Estaing had designed a plan for increasingreal Government R&D funding 8 percent peryear for 5 years beginning in 1980; When Mr.Mitterrand was elected, he more than doubledthat goal: During 1982-85; the Mitterrandgovermnent had planned to increase R&D ex-penditures 17.8 percent with the objective of81J6ii-dihg 2.5 percent of French gross nationalproduct on R&D by 1985.56

Mitterrand's emphasis on increasing R&Dspending was part of an ambitious industrialpolicy for France which included employmentat d education policies as well as planned mar-k:; programs in several areas of high technol-ogy; including PA. 6 7 The programs were all de-signed around the Socialist principles ofdecentralization; democratization; humanism,and irism. For example; researche!.-sar F. r t:rjogt to have a social and economicf-unco'on capitalism hits inhibited; Moretraiisfer of tech-hole& between industry andGovernment is seen as one way of enablingsuch functions to be Undertaken and the na-tionalization of induStries is considere4 to bethe mechanism for achieving social and eco-nomic research.

Several key high-technology industries; in-chiding computers; telecommunications equip-ment, aircraft, and electronics have beennationalized. This is iii addition to the previ-ously nationalized antornaker Renault; oilcompany Elf Aquitaine, and aircraft manufac-turer Aerospatiale. Today, about three-fourthsof all industrial R&D Spending takes place innationalized companies.B' For informationtechnology, including PA, the figure is con-siderably higher as Plmost every major indus-trial actor in the area has been reorganized to

"Pierre Aigrain, "The French Experience in High Technolo-gy:: Center for Strategic and International Studies, George-town University, Washington, D.C.. p. 2:

n terview with M: Morel; COnseiller Technique du Presidentde la Republique, June 20, 1983.

67'French Technology Preparing for the 21st Century." Scien-tific American. November 1982.

"I bid.

reflect a majority Government ownership in-/

_ Mitterrand has two high-technology plansfor PA. (The plans both/had roots in the d'Es-taing government, but were reorganized byMitterrand to reflect a stronger Governmentrole and increased funding.) The first, pub-lished in April 1982;69 includes plans for ro-botics, machine tool's; _and numerical controldevices. It is_aften referred to as the FiliereRobotique.*__Tha second technology plan forPA_waapublisheilby the Ministry of Researchand Industry in_July 1982.60 This is referredto 68 the Filiere EleCtronique and includes aidfor CAD and CIM.

terest.

Fillers RobotiqueThree goals have been announced for the

Filiere Robotique: productivity improvements,better working conditions; ard economic gainfrom the sale of PA equipment. The last goalis of particular interest to the .French. Al-though Renault is France's largeot manufac-turer of PA equipment; representing 50 per-cent of France's industrial commitment to PAresearch, France still imports more than 50percent of its PA consumption.'"

The three goals of the Filiere Robotique areto be iMplemented through programs of in-creased R&D in robotics; automation; me-chanics; electronics; hychmulica; and software;increased production of PA components andmaterials; diffiision of automation tech-nologies; and the use of PA in a variety of eco-nomic sectors. In 1981, total French Govern-ment assistance to the Filiere Robotiqueamounted to 251-million -francs-x$29,4rnillian),of which 91 million francs ($10.7 Million) wentto R&D and 160 million ($18.7 Million) to man-

"L'Utilisation de is Robotique Dans is Production et sesPer-spectives D'Avenir, Conseil Econormque et Social 2 Avril 1982.

5A. "Etliere" in France is a targeted industry grouping or othergoal around winch a GoVernment plan for R&D funding.pro-duetien investment, eduCation, and dissemination assistancehas been developed. There are six iilieres in France today: ro-botics, electronics, energy, biotechnology; working conditions,and cooperation with developing countries.

"Mere Etectronique, Plan du Dossier, Ministre de la Re-cherche et de l'Industrie, 28 Juillet 1982.

"'Ibid.

3 69

354 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Educatibn, and the Workplace

ufacturer assistance. Plans for 1982 includedincreasing the R&D budget by 29 percent andthe aid to industry by 104 percent.62

Within the Filiere Robotique there is a sep-arate plan for machine tools. Le Plan MachineOutil is a 3-year venture in which the FrenchGovernment expects to spend 2.3 billionfrancs ($269 million) from 1983-85; The plan'smain objective is to double production ofFrench machine tools within 3 years. Key ele-ments of this effort; according to the FrenchGovernment's published plan, Were the nation-alization of C,G,E,, Saint-Gobain, and Thom-

-bon; and majority Government participationin Matra and Dassault. The French Govern-ment also expressed interest in reorganizingthe commercial activities, of small robotics material manufacturers," but no course of actionfor such was detailed.

There are three Government ministries andnine separate agencies involved in the FiliereRobotique; The defense ministry, through itsoffice of Space Research and Studies, habbproject (Projet SOLARIS) to study the use ofrobots in space. The ministry of industry andresearch has 26 projectS ranging from the useof robotics for the handicapped to their use innuclear reactor inspection. Inv() Isied in theseprojeCtS are the National Scientific ResearchCenter (CNRS), the Institute for ComputerSCieriteb and Autoination Research (INRIA),the Data Processing Agency (ADI), the Na-tional Agency to Valorize (commercialize) Re-Search (ANVAR), and the Atomic EnergyCommission (CEA). The education ministryhas a two-part research program which in-eludes both the French university system andthe Grandes Eco les; In total; the French esti-mate that these projects involve the equiva-lent of between 250 and 300 researchers."

The industrial component of this researchactivity includes collective centers (both tradeassociations and quasi-Government groups)formed around machine tools; textiles; petro-leum, and other products; In addi' -.arch

"I bid."Ibid."Ibid.

is being carried out in both nationalized cor-porations such as Renault, and in private firmslike Telernecanique.66

_A related program is being carried out bythe Agency for the Development of Auto-mated Production (ADEPA) of the Ministryof Industry to promote the application of CNCmachine tOola,-rOhots, flexible machining cells,and flexible manufacturing systems in smalland medium-sized firms. Representatives fromADEPA identify possible users of PA equip-ment and invite the firms to participate in a2-year trial use of PA- in their production fa-cility. Firms that agree are given equipmentto use for 2 years and technical assistancefrom ADEPA. At the end of the 2-year alaiperiod, the firm has the option of paying forthe machinery (less 2

itdepreciation

charges) or. returning t and paying only thedepreciation cost. Of the first 100 companiesthat participated, almost none returned theequipment.66

Fit', ElectroniqueThis program s stated long-term goal was

to place France on a technological level in elec-tronics equal to that of the United States andJapan. The infusion of 140 billion francs-($16.4billion) in-R&D-funds over the 5 years follow-ing 1982 was expected to produce a surplusbalance of trade in information technology,create 80,000 new jobs, assure mastery ofinformation technologies, and accelerate-theproduction of information technology prod-ucts by 3 to 9 percent each year. Eight areasof achievement were outlined:

computer-aided circuit design for verylarge scale integrated circuits,computer-aided design and manufac-turing,artificial intelligenee,_computer graphics,peripherals,

"Eugene Merchant, personal communication; and Anment of the Industrial Energy Conservation Projiram for thePulp and Paper and General Manufacturing Industries, Nation-al Research Council, National Academy Press, 1983, p. 14.

Ch: 9International Support for Programmable Automation 355

computer-aided translation,computer-aided instruction, andconsumer electronics.

In January 1983, the Ministry published itsplan of action.67 In the area of computer-aideddesign and manufacturing, an evaluativegroup was assembled to design research, de-velopment, and production plans. The group'smembers included the Direction Geilerale desTelecommunications (part of the national tel-ephone concern), the Delegation Generale auxArmements (part of the Ministry of Defense),DE ILI .(Direction des Industries Electroni-ques ef de 1'Informatique; part of the Ministryof Industry and Research), ADI, CNRS, andINRIA.

This group, along with several othersformed in the other areas of the Filiere, createdLe Projet Cadre, designed to pursue four areasof inquiry: scientific calculation, CAD, man-agement of information technology productproduction, and software development forPA.68 The implementation plans for this proj-ect were not specified.

Implementation of the FilieresElectronique and Rohotique

The public announcements concerning theelectronics and robotics sectors programsmade in the year or so following the implemen-tation of the programs (early 1982) became atonce more ambitious and lesi specific, andwere accompanied by reduced funding. Func17ing m 1982 for the electronics sector amountedo about 6 billion francs and 1983 expenditures

were expected to be approximately 8 billionfrancsfar short of the pre Dosed 28 billioneach year."

"Mini Are de la Recherche et de l'Industr',i, Programme Afo-biiisateNr. 20 Janvier 1983.

p. 6."See for example. A. F. P. Sciences, No 341. Jan. 17. 1983,

pp. i-4.

Funding problems for the Mitterrand gov-ernment have been pervasive, and the plansfor a vast effort in PA have suffered signifi-cantly as a result. In discussions with severalFrench Government agencies involved in PAin the summer of 1983; it was revealed thatthe average agency cutback for 1983-84 wasabout 20 percent from levels projected in 1981;this not only virtually eliminates the increasesdesired by the Mitterrand government overthat spent by d'Estaing; but for several agen-cies requires_ operating levels that are lowerthan those of the last administration. This re-duced spending was not accompanied by &con-solidation or reductionin the nuinber of PAprojects. The entirety of the robotics and elec-tronics sectors plans are intact. The result maybe that PA projects are funded at inconse-quential levels.

Several other problems were encountered bythe Mitterrand government in its effort to mo7bilize the country's PA resources. Substantialdifficulty was encountered with nationaliza-tion, apparently due to a large philosophicaldivergence between executives among the

of na,ionalization and the former Minis-tit. of Research and Industry.

E yen without the financial constraints onFrench PA activities; there would still be se-rious manpower problems. The number of peo-ple with Level I qualifications (approximatelyequal to an American Ph. D.) in informationtechnology is expected, to fall short of needsby 70,000 for the period 1981 -90 in France. Inthe French context, this number is quite large;in 1979 it was estimated that 105,000 scien-tists and engineers were actively involved inall aspects of French science (energy, pharma-ceuticals, mechanics, etc., as.well as informa-

,,__tion technology).70

"Jean-Pierre Letouzey, Scientific Mission, Embassy ofFrance, Statement for the American Association for the Ad-

ncement of Sciencr.s. Mar. 24. 1983.

356 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment; Education; ,,,nd the Workplace

United KingdomDirect Government Role

The British Government, as a rule, does notactively intervene in the national economy asmuch as the Japanese or French Govern-ments. The Government provides funds forR&D in cis! areas and in areas with commer-cial potential. The Department of Trade andIndustry (DTI) has recently developed a setof schemes including support for R&D; feasi-bility studies; capital equipment investments;and demonstration programs '. order to en-courage the implementatio: i PA in theUnited Kingdom.

Since World War II, the British Govern-ment has been spending sizable amounts insupport of science and technology; however,the numerous British economic and technolo-gy policies have lacked a clear objective andhave suffered from poor public-private sectorcooperation. Overall, the British machine tooland robot industries are small, but the CADand CAM software industry is strong. Finan-cial support for "high-technology' industrieshas not been as great as support for the auto;shipbuilding; and steel industries; Since thelatter half of the 1970's; .DTI programs havefocused more on commercial exploitation ofnew inventions than on R&D; per se; althoughmechanisms and funding have been prr.videdto support research where private companieshave been reluctant to invest. These programshave not always resulteci in commercially successful products, the most notable example be-ing the Concorde.7'.

In the late 1970's the L1:71our governmentinvestigated PA. The two , , gst noteworthy ef-forts yielded the ACARD report (named afterthe Advisory Council for Applied _Research

Developmeut, which is responsible for ad-vising Government ministers) and the Inger-soll report. The ACARD report documents a

Malmgren, op._ cit.. quoting Gilpin._ p._ 51; and- .David _A:Brown: "Funding Dispute Snags British Pxograrn,- A vnitionWeek and Space Technolrgy. Apr. 18, 1983, p. 65.

working group's effort "to consider the effec-,,tiveness of technology transfer and the ade-quacy of currentresearch and development onjoining and assembly in relation to the needsof U,K, industry; and to make recommenda-tions," It noted that the United Kingdomhad many fewer robots in place than other in-dustrialized countries; and it recommended ac-celerated application of PA,

DTI's predecessor, the Department of In-dustry, commissioned a report on industrialrobots from Ingersoll Engineers in 1979. Thereport "outlined the scope for, and importanceof, robotics; identified problems facing thetake up of robots, andput forward a nationalrobot programme, which foreshadowed the ac-tual programmes followed by the Departmentof Industry and the Science and EngineeringResearch Council," Initially; under theThatcher government; it appeared as thoughthe initiative in PA would be left up to privateindustry. However, at the "Automan 1981"Conference, Prime Minister Thatcher, in aspeech endorsing robotics, indicated the Gov-ernment's willingness to take action to pro-mote the use of PA in British industry.73

DTI also oversees an elaborate network ofagencies encouraging R&D and the transferof technology throughout the economy; Theseinclude the Research and Development Re-quirements Boards; Industrial Research Es-tablishments, Industrial Research Associ%-tions, and the British Technology Group(BTG).

BTG was fortred in 1981 as an independentpublic corporation set up to promote the de-velopment and application of new technology.It includes the former National Research De-velopment Council (NRDC) and the NationalEnterprise Board (NEB); BTG attempts to en-sur- the.commercial utilization of the re.sults

"The report, entitled Jeining and Assembly: The Impact ofRobots and Automation. was released in October 1979. JamesFleck, Univel sky of Aston, U.K., personal communication.

"James Fleet., personal communication.

374

Oh ')ternabonal Support for Programmable Automation 357

of Government-sponsored research and pro-vides capital to private business in order toencourage innovations. While BTG is underthe auspices of the Secretary of State forTrade and Industry, its day-to-day activitiesare free of Government intervention. BTG re-ceives its operating income from royalties,licensing, and other forms of reimbursement.It also receives financing from DTI which itrepays with interest.

In early 1983; in part as a response to Jap-anese and American efforts to develop "fifthgeneration'. computers, the British set up anational advanced technology research pro-gram. A committee chartered by the Ministerfor Information Technology and headed by`John Alvey recommended a Government/in,dustry/university cooperative program aimedat four main areas: very large scale integratedelectronic components, software engineering,manimachine interfE "9, and intelligent knowl-edge-based system-

The Governrner, I pay half of the cost ofthis collaborative effort in industry;and 190 percent of research costs in universi-ties. The "Alvey Report" estinn.cA that aca-demic institutions should carry out S 50 mil-lion ($70.5 million)_ of research over _5 years,and industry 1' 300 million ($423 million), re-sultirg ir a Government expenditure of ap-proximately 1' 200 million $282

Government Support to IndustryResearch and Th.velopmet

Support for irdu.stry R&D. --A series of pro-grams was set ,ip in the late 1970's in orderto promote tr. diffusion of technologythroughout the econni v; these includer! theMicroelectronics Applicatior Program (MAP),the Manufactu:.ing Advisory Service (MAS),and a Robotics Advisory Service (RAS); MASwas established in October 1977 in order toincrease the competitiver?ss of manufactur-ing firms by offering subsidized consulting

The Department of Trade and Industry, Programme forAdvanced Information technology," The Repott of the AlveyCominittee (London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office; 1982).

services; Its budget in 1982 was A' 9.25 million($13 million); with 80 percent going to smalland medium-sized enterPrises;76 The RAS isoperated by the Production Engineering Re-search As-z,ociation (PERA), as is MAS; RASoffers an friformation service, a demonstrationcenter; and subsidi.zatior of : easibility studiesto assist small businePses iti applying robotsto production procez,E.4e!:, DTI highlightedthese_programs as part of a campaign _declar-ing 1983 "Quality Assurance Year." The in-tention is to make industry more aware of theGovernment fina.nt support available to im-plement robots, lie -.4';..)le machining systems,CAD, and microelectronies. The year 1982 wasdeclarcd "Information Technology Year," andrelevant demonstration programs, public sem-inars, and conferences were held."_The Science and 0ngineering ResearchCouncil. The Science and Engineering re-search council (SERC) is one of five researchcouncila funded by the Department of Educa-tion and Science. The function of the councilsis to promote and sponsrsruniversities and in Government. SERC'S "Ro=botics Initiative" was announced in July 1980.It ailed for SERC to provide 2.5 million($3.53 million) fox the study of future genera-tions of robots. The ,program has already re-sulted in the development at Oxford Univer-sity of a laser scanning device for arc-weldingapplications.

Department of Trade and IndustrySpecial Programs

l'he Robot ,Suppon, Prag--am. DTIat& the Robot Suppore Frog ram in April 1981in response to the recommenda, ions of theACARD and Ingersoll reports. The programwas originally funded at A' 10 million (;14.11million) in three areas: 11 SI:tpport for feasibili-ty studies in order to allow a company to deter-mine if robots would be cost-effective. A com-pany may choose a consultant from DTI's listof approved consultants for tie feasibilitystudy: The Department will then pay 50 per-

"OECD, Innovation in Small and Medium Enterprise, Paris,1976:

'Jame's Fleck, personal communication.

3 17

358 Comuutarized Manulacturinc Autpnlation: Employment, Education, and the Wbrkplabe

cent of the cost of the study for up to 15 per=son-days. 2) Support for rObbt purchase andinstallation. The GoVetriment will support upto one-third of the cost Of the robot and asso-ciated capital equipment. Development costssuch as the labor cost for development en-gineers; etc., and the cost of new tooling arecovered by grants of up to one-thitd. The De-partment will also provide support for lease-fi-nanced robots. 3) Support for companies seek.ing to develop or manufacture robots. Grantsare available for up to one-third of the costsof "projects involving the design and devel-opnierit by U.K. manufacturers of new indus-trial robots_ and associated equipment up tothe point of commercial production.""

Despite these ambitious product and proc-ess development schemes,_ many companiesapplying for such fiindF. have been turneddown by banks with strict lending criteria,even though the Government guarantees 80percent of the loans. Bank restraint has beenattributed to the perception-that many appli-cants slow insufficient cummitrnent to theirprojects. It is thought that as many as one infive of the partielpantf: may fail." In addition;under the consultancy portion of the program;many firms decide not to implement PA be-cause the new technologies do not appear tobe the most cost effective mariner of improv-ing their productioxi i....ocesses: Furthermore,the -,pproved list of consultants provide byDTI includes a disclaimer ac to the compe-tence of the consultants.

By Api-A 1983, the follow;ng fuads had beencommitted under the Robot Support Program:

92 company installations .. 6._5 million($9.1725 robot manuiacturers . /' 2.7 million--W.81 thillibii)69 consultancies . T 129,000 ($182,000)

DTI ha-Sib-eel-1- disappointed by the low levelof interest from industry as measured by ap:plications for funding. While the initial alkica;

"Isepai anent of Industry, U.K. brochure; "Government Sup-port for Induiitrial Robots."

'Mtn Dicicson: "Caution Among the 'linkers The Finan-,.ial Times of LOYILOIX Sept. 18, 1983. p. 14.

Hot of funds to the program imy ultimatelybe spent, the future of the program Fsfain. However; robots will continue to be `stip-.,

ported under a Flexible Manufaetiiring Sys :tern Program (see below).79

Other Programs. Similar programs havebeen set up under an umbrella "support forinnovation policy. These programs have beendevised to promote CAD; computer-aided de-sign. manufacture, and test of electronics de-viees (CADMAT);_ software development; fi-ber optics and opto-electronics; and flexiblemanufacturing:8°

CAD. Goilerritneht prograniF includedemonstrations at firms, support for fea-sibility Studies, management seminars;regional demonstration centers to pQrmit"hands-on study," in-depth courses to aidde:..ign engineers andproduc:tion mana-t,ers in implementing the technology,,;rants of up to 25 percent for R&D in-volving new applications of CAD, andgrants oi up to 25 percent of cost "for thedesign; development or of new orsignificantly impro.ed products or proc-esses:"CADMAT; Government programs in-clude management seminars, short coursesfor managers ankt engineers, demonstra-tions; a CADMAT information service onthe state of the art of the technolc .fy aadits ap_plidatiOns, grants of up 25 per-cent fbi the development or CADMATtoo:s and standards, grants of up to one-third of hardware/software costs, and st tpri6rt for installation and training Fost,. offirst-time users.FleXibl6Nanufacturing Syst: ms (i 11S);

The FMS scheme was initiated in .'-one1982 with a budget of 1' 60 million !$k14:6million). This scheme will provide selec-1ve finazicial assistance to cover some ofthe costs of feasibility studies; installa-tion of a new FMS; and integrating exist=ing plant into a flexible manufaetiiringsystem:

'9James Fleck, personal commune- -ion."Department oi 'node and Inch, try Brocl, ire; op. cit.

Ch. 9International Support for Programmable Aptomation 359

The "Support for innovation" policy also isbehind anticipated government _funding fortechnical collaboration between Jaguar cars,Ltd., BritiSh=owned Datnichi Sykes RoboticsLtd. (a joint venture between the BritishSykes group and the Japanese Dainichi KikoCompany), and Dainichi Kiko. 'These compa=nies recently agreed to develop new automaproduction systems for Jaguar automotive

In addition, the National Engineering Lab-oratory and certain trade as:-.ciations have re-

Ind unr ore May Lead to Robots.- Automotive News,Jan

ceived approximately 650;000 ($917;000)from DTI annually for robot-related studies.These grants have included 15;000 ($21;000)to support the establishment of the BritishRobot Association, and 240;000 ($339;030)for the establiShthel, t of Uhimation (Europe)Ltd. in 1979. The N a t ional Research Develop-ment Corporation provided 420,000(8592,000) in venture capital financing forUnimation (Europe) Ltd. More aid has beenproposed, but is under question due to thetakeover of Unimation by Westinghouse."

"James Fleck, personal communication.

Other CountriesThis section examines PA in Norway, Can-

ada. Italy, and the Netherlands. Governmentsin each of these countries _play a less promi-nent role in PA than the' governments dis-cussed auove, and less information is availabk-on their programs.

NorwayDirt ;_,4iverninetrit Role

The ,.X1:-/ent of use of new _technologies, aswell as the geilc.rai_health of Norway's exportSector and the relative price of Norwegi_anproducts, are and ave been key problems forthe nation's economy." They have bet5ti thesubjec.t of a major study and planning efforts.Norwegian work environment programs arediscussed it chapter'5.

The Lied CommitteeIn March 1978; the Lied Conn, .1...toe was ap-

pointed to study the T.;tructural ; ,rouiems fac-

Berge. ti.,coni Embassy of Norway, per-communication, Feb. 2.1, 198,1,

- ri,1 24 t!1,

ing the Norwegian economy and to identifyareas of possible growth in Norwegian indus-try, While recommending a longterm strate-gy for Norwegian industrial development, thecommittee stressed that the rble of theGovernment should be limited to PrOvidingsound macroeconomic conditions. The commit=tee emphasizOd that it is not the Government'srole to deter-iiine which firms or which typesof industries: should be given pribrity. Instead,it suggested that the decentralized marketsystem, wherein individual firms make deci-sions based on what they predict will be prof-itable, should continue to prevail in Norway.

The committee suggested that tl,e develop-ment of along- term strategy should take intoaccount the following conditions of Norwegiannational resources:

a considerable quantity of c;leap e!.9ctricpower,full coverage of Aiture needs for oil andnatural gas,production of a considerable amount of oiland natural gas for export, and

360 ,:oinputerieti Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace. .

reasonable access to capital due to oil andnatural gas export revenues:84

The committee also recommended that Nor-way concentrate on improving its export sec-tor, mainly by lowering the cost of NorwegiangoodS:relative to those_ of surrounding.coun-tries: This could be achieved through produc-tivity increaSeS, structural rationalization;minimization of wage increases, and tax ad-justment.

The committee deenied the ability to applynew technological developments crucial to in-dustrial expansion. It argued that the Govern-ment could create the proper conditions fortechnological diffusion through an expansionof the educational system to provide moreengineers and qualified skilled workers: Final-ly, the committee recommended that the Gov-ernment entourage the establishment of newindustries based on new technologies: Thoughthe Norwegian Government has generally ac=cepted th.f., recommendations of the tied COM=mittee, there has been no partieular actionbased on the report:

The Norwegian Ministry of LocalGovernment and Labor

A worldng group of the Norwegian Ministryof Local Governnient and Labor reported tothe Ministry in 1980 on the. potential effect.-;of steadily increasing factory automation onemplo., rnent and working conditions in the1980's: The working group predicted that au-tomated materials handling systems will allowthe Norwegian wood- processing industry to re-

its labor force by 50 percent by 1985: Italso predicted that the number of computer-ized numerically controlled (CNC) mechinetools will incre&.3 in the machining inc tstry,as will the application of robots for Wadingand spray- painting:85

The working group pointed out that whilethere is a Wide range of possible applications{ information "..e-chnolo* in inchstry. these

Of utredninger. En -11:: WorkingConditi,.^- in the 1986Cs, mnr,J 1980:33.

''I bid.

technologies are at different phases in their de-velopment and are being disseminated at dif-ferent rates to different user groups: Thismakes it difficult to characterize the conse-quences for employment. In predicting the ef-fects that factory automation will have on theNorwegian economy as a whole; the workinggroup argued that continuous process andelectronics industries 'have a greater potentialfor productivity gains than does the 'Metal=working industry. Although firnis may imple=ment the new technologies; given the Smalland medium size of Norwegian firMS it WASpredicted that the beicc-i its will be limited.

Canada

Federtii Support for Technology-EnhancedProductivity Program

CAN$.10 million ($8 million) over 5 years hasbeen committed to 10 microelectronics centersthroughi ie Fi,;leral STEP (Support for Tech-nology- a7ac ;Productivity) program." TheSTEP prigrain is intended to help producersof .microelectronies and advanced product' 'nequipment to develop products that will becompetitive in international markets: It is tilso---------------intended to help users implement the teclmol,bgy efficiently and develop 1.1Z3t.' and improvedproducts for the Canadian economy.

STEP incentives for producers include reim-bursement of-

up to 75 percent of oxpenditureson R&T),up to 50 percent of eligible costs of ma-chinery and equipment; andup to 15 per-.3nt of eligible costs ofbuildings:

STEP incent.:ves for users include reim-bursement for:

feasibility studies-- ap to 100 percent oftotal costs; with a maximum of CAN$10,000 ($8;000);in"- ,-3rn nt a ti on of a new microelectronitproduc . or processup to C2:.N$100,000($80;090) or 75 percent of total costs; and

Ch. 9International Support for Programmable Automation 361

design of custom microelectronic equip-mentup to CAN$500,000 ($400;000) or75 percent of total costs."

Manpower Consultative ServiceEducation and Retraining

The Department of Employment and Immi-gration established the Manpower Consulta-tive Service;a key mechanism for aiding work-ers displaced for economic; technological; orother reasons: The Service provides assistanceto employers who work with their employees

' to reduce manpower levels or develop workforce skills.. In particular. it operates on an as-neethad basis; becoming involved when masslayoffs are expected to occur; and supplement,ing local labor market institutions for brief(e.g., 6- to 12-month) periods.

The Manpower Consultative Service wasfounded in 1963 to encourage labor and man-agement to work together on problems ofworker displacement: The Service has a pro-gram whereby management and labor consultas equal partners unittees on matters ofrnntiW comet : as turnover; employ-ment ir .t- ti ;37, 'worl.dng conditions; absen-teeism, rung requiremero-r-- and manage,inert studies. It provides Up co 50 percent ofCie cost of _C-ie labor. adjustment corrunittee,and up to 50 percent, of worker relocation costsif a committee trans.rers workers in order tokeep them employed. Where new tec,inologyis the cause of disphcement, cominitueeslook at the impact on skill needs -and try todevelop means e4: counseling, retraining; andplacement .:ur those who. are displaced. Bothindustrial training for work on new machin-ery f-ir new job content and institutional train-ing :11 trade schools are provided. In addition,subsidies are provided for older workers totrain for new jobs. Companies do not alwaysparticipate in Lhe MCS program; as they arerequired to continue tt.;1..av the workers' fr::-benefits during the transition perioct"

""The News Friai ( ;r,;ario,"__ February 1983; and"13uilding _Ontario- m the 1980 . FULD, January 1981.

'I tarry MonkAErnployment and Immigration Departmentof Canada, personal vommuoication, Dec. 98 3; am' M. Ben-dick, Jr.. "The Bole of Public Program a -1 Private Marketsin Reemploying Workers t -:located by Fcore-Irnic Change!: TheUrban Institute. 4Nfovember 1982.

The Ontario Board of IndustrialLeadership and Development

The governmeLA of the Province of Ontarioestablished the Board of Industrial Leadershipand Development (WILD)_ in January 1981,comprised of cabinet ministers responsit foreconomic and regional development. It devel-ops long-term investment strategies for theOntario Government and funds programsthrough grants, loans, and other forms of as-sistance. The BILD program is budgeted atCAN$1.5 billion ($L2 billion) over a 5-yearperiod. Overall objectives of the BILE, pro-gram are to develop an import replacementand export potential in order to improve On-tario'r; trade balance; technological develop-Ment; training; and job creation: .

The Board of Industrial Leadership andvelopment has recognized that new specializedskills will be required with the implementationof computer-assisted manufacturing. Underthe Training in Business and Industry pro-.gram, BILD subsidizes up to one-third csf thecost of retraining workers, with the remainderpaid by the worker and the employer. BILDalso provides equipment grants to e-clt.cationalfacilities; research grants; and career counsel-ing services:

Under itF high-technology deve'.:pment pro-gram, BILD has allocated CA.Mb million($80 million) to five industry-oriemed technol-ogy centers to provide ex?ertise t companiesapj.lying ne-v technologies. The five centersare described Mew:"

The Pntario ts,'ezitre for Advance-cl Manufac-turing.This center has two racilities; onefor CAD and CAM in Cambridge, and onefor robotics in Peterborough. Funding willbe CANS40 million ($32 million) ,srcr 5years, beginning. in 1933. These faciiiCeswi:l provide consultation services for the im-pl-Trentation of CAD and CAM and robot

will help. individual firms tailor theology to their needs.)ntario Centre for Aficroelecb.-onics.

This center; lice hod in Ottawa; will rec4CANS20- million 1si6 million) ove: 5 years:rilrecenter was opened on October 28; 1982.

"Brochure, "The News from BILD, Ontario," February 983.

3 7

362 Con-tputerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and, the Workplace

The Ontario Centre for Automotive Tarts'Technology. This center was establishedin order to encourage restructuring of theauto industry. CAN$14.5 million ($11.6 Mil=lion) will be provided over 5 years for tleVeloprnent of new product designs, marketresearch, and management informationservices. The center was opened on Decem-ber 14, 1982.The Ontario Centre for Resource Machin-ery. This center will receive CAN$20 mil-lion ($16 million) to undertake R&D for themining and forestry-equipment industries.The center was opened on December 15,1982.The Ontario Centre for Farm Equipmentand Food Processing. This center will re-ceive CANs',10 million ($8 million) over 5years to undertake R&D: The center wasopened or January 31; 1983;

ItalyItaly appears to have no specific policy to

prctect tPrgeted industries or promote themovement of resources out of particular indus-tries. However, the Italian Government ownsa large shale of certain industries (nuclearpower, electrical components, teleconununica-tions equipment, chemicals; steel; and ship-building) and financial institutions: The State

;intervened in the economy with aid to in-stry in the postwar period; without an over-

d "industrial policy."Most notable in Italy has been the govern-

ment promotion of private investment in theunderdeveloped southern regions; Investmentgrants, low interest loans; and tax breaks havebeen provided to private firms to encourageinvestment in the South; aid State-owned

. firms have been required to invest iii theSouth: Such investment has been encouragedin order to develop thiP -.gion and proVid'employment to avoid the migration of South=ern Italiats to Northern ItalY.89

"'Lawrence Frank°, European Industrial Policy: Past, Pre:s-ent, and Future, the Conference Board in EurOpe. FebruarS,19 p. 34.

The U.S. RObotic industries Association(RIA) estimates Italy is the fifth largest robotproducer but may become the third, after Ja-pan and the United States, by 1990.9° Robotuse in Italy is particularly heavy in automobilemanufacturing. Fiat, for example, is both amajor user and developer of robotic systems;Olivetti, an office equipment manufacturer, isalso heavily involved with PA;

The National MaChiiie Tool Builders' ASSo-elation estimates that Italy _ranks fifth in ma-chine tool PrOdUctiol 4lid third in machine toolexports, as of 1982.4' There are close researchties among machine tool producer firms, andbetween prOdtitera and the Government. Re-search projects on manufacturing are spon:§orad by a financial agf--Inoy (IMI) which chan-nelS row interest loans and Government

grants to elnall and medium-sizedfirms 'Etn National Council ofRese begun a -nmufacturing

involves se : errsIt atiar sities and industries.

The NetliMaiiiISWhile the NetherIzzads is neither a major

ser nOr prOdueer of PA technologies, theDutch are increasingly concerned with8.cat-,1.Mg up" in the development and application ofPA. Industrial prodpctivity is a source ofgreat concern to the Iliitch because 64percentOf incluStrial output is exported. There is con-cern, however, that auteniat;gai could lead -oa loss of industrial jobs. A study by the Neth-erlands Center for Technology Trends con-cluded that the gains in productivity thatcould be achieved by increased automationwould outweigh the labor displacement be-cause low productivity has made it diffieUltfor Dutch. products to compete with those oflow-wage developing Countries."

The Ditch have several programs promot-ing or regulatinc the production and use ofPA: /

"RIA, Worldwide Robotics Survey and Directory, 1983."National Machine Tool Builders lissociaticy., 1983.1984

Econonilt lIzTndbook of the Machine Tool Industry."I. H.1'irrunermaxi, Arriomatfsering in De Fabriek: Vertrek-

punten Voor Belekt, Delft University Pess, 1983.

* The Ministry of Education a./id SciencePolicy and Ministr3. of Economic Af-fairs launched an R &D program in Octo-ber 1982 aimed at improving technologi-cal expertise and research potenxial at thetechnological universities;The Ministry of gconomic Affairs is pre-paring a program for stimulating the PA

.industry; This pro,g-ram will include anawareness promotion campaign; provide.subsidies and low interest loans to indus-

9--m!,?rndrior Supoott for Programmable Automation 363

try promote investment in PA, andsponsor demonstration projects:_The Ministry of Social Affairs will moni-tor employment and working environ-ment impacts.

2 The Ministry of Education and SciencePolicy, the Ministry of Economic Affairs;and the Netherlands Organization for AP-plied Scientific Research will adminiStereducation, training, and retrainingprograms.

Chapter 10

Policy Issues and Options

Con ten ts

ntroduction : : .367--;takeholciers 368The Reasons for t Federal Role

The Challenge of New Policy 370Federal Policy :.-trateir,' 371

Existing Federal Poli 9ptions for New Initiatives 373

Existing Federal ,. Technology Development-and Use 373Options for Techno veloprnent and Diffusion Policy 374'

Existing Federal Empoyinent Policy (Excluding Training) 376

Options for Employment Policy 381Existing Federal Work Environment Policies 386Opt i( fur Work Environment Policy ..... 2'387

:sting Federal Education; Training; and Retraining Policy 391

Options for Eduacation; Training and Retraining Policy 393

TablePag,c)

Sensitivity of Estimated Numbers of Dislocated Workers inJanuary 19733 to Alternative Eligibility Standards andEconomic Assumptions 385

S.

Chapter 10

Policy Issues and Options

IntroductionThe central polity question that emerges

from OTA's computer:ted manufacturing ante:mation assassment is, "Should there be a na.,tionEd strategy for the development arid use ofprogrammable automation (PA)?" Althoughsuch a strategy coold take many forms, thefact that the oppz-rf amities anti problemsposed by programmable automation are inter-connected makes it appropriate to consider apoliey strategy combining actions in severalareas. PA may well become an important fac-tor in national productivity growth and im-provement in economic performance; but theSpread Of this technology can aggravate ex-isting social and economic problems as well ascreate new -Ones for individUal regions and forthe Nation as a whole. While the Potential forPA to benefit industry and the 6c-ciiiardy coun-teracts arguments for slowing it§ spread, therisks inherent in rapid raise ques-tions about whether, and hOW, the spread ofPA should be accelerated. Among the priii=cipal motivations for policy are

The immaturity of PA technology andlimited experience with its application;Although current tkhriorogyjs 44:licablein many Situations; cher developmentand applications experiev:::k are neededbefore it; potential for itopi :wing prOduc-tivity, work environment, and proz?uct,quality can b,1 fully realized.The competitive environment in v.-hichPA 6ie veloprnent and use are takIngGovernments in countries that are or .rruk,oecome U.S. trading partners are encouraging the development and use of PAabroad; while markets for many goodsand services; including PA equipment ardsysterrici; are becoming increasingly- inter-n-dim:al; Both situations militate ecainsteekiitileeericy.

The risk of growth in unemployment. In ,

the absence of growth in production lev-els, PA be associated with tmemploy-ment, ealloially in the East North Cen-tral, Middle and Other. areasWhere PA use is expected to beheavy; andwhere local economies are vulnerable toimport competition and Other economicfactors.The risk of aaiterse effects on the psycho-logical aspects of the work environment.These effects, arising from the combinedinfluences of new technology and jobsign; may not only diminish productivitygains from PA; but may constitute newhealth problems; Collective bargain :11gwill allow csly a fraction of the labor forceto resolve these problems on their own.Because PA and structural changes in theeconomy will limit the number and rangef:f manufacturing jobs availablr; manyworkers will bCreate less able to move outof disagreeable situatic as.The ramifications tot education; training;and retraining at all levels. The appropri-ateness of the .aiiz of skiils within tile la-bor force governs '.1(..th the rate at rhichPA can be developer' and and theenent el adjustment through retraining;or relwatinn: that may t,t-,:se-az;acychanging skill requirements. The cha:lenges posfmk by PA raid m v. tech;no!rgies cone at a time when 'At, capaci-ties and resour-:es of the instructionalsystem are particularly strained

As the above list indicates, there are factorsthat motivate p-olicy promoting PA (techno-Icecal immaturit, and inte-mational com-petition) and fact irs that .nditate againsta..,celezating PA acjption that stipport com-plementary -iolicy in other areas the risks of

3836-/

368 Computeri:ed uifacturing Automation: Employment Education, and the WOrkplade

worsening_unemploy_ment and work environ-ments and the need to assure appropriateinstructional capacitieS). Furthermore; tOti-cerns raised by PA are also aspects of largerpolicy problems. Competitiveness and unem-ployment, for example, reflect many circum-stances. not just use of new technology. As-suaging these concerns, in particular, requiresa healthy economysomething that PA caninfluence but not guarantee.

The remaining portions of this_chapter willidentify key grelips of people with an interestin t he use and impacts of PA and define ex-isting and potential Federal roles. The chapternext _adresses_overall strategy for policy te-garding_PA._ Then, current programs in theareas of technology development and _use.work environment, employment,_ and educa-tion and training are -Outlined, and options f-1,new policy are preSented. The final four 8e.-ti-611 illu; rate L.116 types of policy_ that haveernergek: -rein more or 1688 independent policyTiakiri;s, i i each area, and they relate to exist-

1-0:-.14tion those options that could bei-Jinbi,16i1 into integrated strategies.

StakeholderSNot surprisingly. the broad set of issues sur-

rounding the sprea3. of PA has aroused eon-p:inong a diverse group of stalteolders.

Solving the problems _a_ssodated with PA andrealizirgits_ potential benefits to the Nationwill involve balancing the interests of the vari-ous players. Six principal groups are con-cerned about_ the shape _of policy relating toprogrammable automa r,ion.

First; there are the developers and producersof PA. including the research corn: inity inboth the public and private sectors e..nd themanufacturers_ and vendors of PA equ.'pmentand systems_ Engineers, computer scientists,.and others in indu§try. academia; research in--Stitution.s. and government are involverl in de-veloping; refining, and applying_. A. As agroup; they are concerned principally with thetechnical performance_ attributes of PA tech-nologies; they tend to treat offects on the useof labor or the work environment as conse-

quences rather than initial considerations: PAdevelopers and producers are interested in theadequacy of funding and facilities for theirwork. They are also interested in the sourcesof funding and goals of R&D. PA manufactur-ers and vendors seek business climate' thatsupport the sale and effective use of PA.

Second; there are the purchasers and users.PA. Managers of manufacturing firms

lake decisions. about research activity and thenature -and type of equipment used in produc-tion. Concern with their ability to competeWith other companies, especially foreign _firms,translates into concerns for production effi-ciency, costs for labor and capital; product de-sign, production processes, whether to makeor buy components, and where to locate pro -duction. The?consider a broad range of hu-man resource issues; from job descriptions;

promotion; and layoffs; to the scopeand quality of education and training in localcommunities and the extent of training theirfirms offer; to labor-management relations andthe scope of managezial_control. As a groiip;they :7:- .e.sist (and protest) Government interven=tion in production and personnel areas, whilethey call for better business climates.

Third. there are the current and future,_members of the labor force; These individualscare about whether they can get and keep jobs;and whrit kinds of jobs are open to thembyoccupation and industry; by compensationle-rel;and by degree of job security; They aladcare about the work environment implicationsof PA utilization; the type andioeation of PAapplications; and trends in job design.. And,they care about the amount; cost; quality, andsources of education and training available.Some labor _force concerns__ e articulated bylabor organizations (in-chiding 'lions), whichare .concerned in part with th potential fornew techriblegy to dirniiiiSh the' membershipby reducing job opportunities in manufactur-ing or shifting them away from unionized in-dustries. Unions have already begun to ad-dress various workplace _concerns through,..ollective bargaining and other activities..HOWeVet, only about a fifth of the labor forcecurrently can influence job design, job secu-

rity,_and training through collective bargain-ing. Hence; much of the current and future la-bor fere-6 lacks focused representation of theirconcerns; and this group may be the least wellrepresented in private or public debates overPA and relevant policy,

Fourth, there are communi=ties stateand locar zovernrnents. p.-rozyi,s par-ticularly_ concerned at conoillic devel-opment_ and mamtainm, employmentbases. Because some communities depend onmanufacturing for employment, and becausethey administer and fund education and train-ing activities at least at lower levels, commu-nities care about the rate and extent of PAproduction and use;

analong with associated

requirements; jchanges in -skill requirements; job mix; and in-structional needs. Even though individualcompanies may adjust their work_ forces ivith-bUt laydffa_ (t}-rough attrition), decreases inCompany hiring may cause or aggravate em-ployment and business problems for the localeconomy., DeClines in employment and busi-ne,S8 levels may in turn give rise to a varietyof'problems for -cbtrimunities that range fromincreased health disorders to .;.-hinirnshed taxre enues.

Fifth; there are educators and trainers: Peo-ple who teaeh_Cliildred_adolescents basecurricula in part on expectations about em-ployment opportunities and W.) design; Peo-ple ;,vhf.c-fitiach adilltS also care about changesin skill teri_iiireirientS andiinclustry hiring pat-terns; their planning and activities-are

sensitive to the rate of clicage, becausethe number of adult students is more subjectto change than the number of ;I'vt stu-dents. Educators and tra'ners of all types areconcerned about the funding, equipment, andfacilities available to them. Currently, theirconcerns Eire likely to be heightened by the bar-rage of potentially conflicting demands andcriticisms from numerous sources.

Sixth and finally, there is the FederalGovernment. Existing Federa' iirOgrams sug-gest ti., t the Government has broad interestsin the development and use of PA. On themilitary side, the Government is concerned

Ch. 10Policy Issues and Options 369

with the implications of PA development anduse for national security and for reducing costsfor defense products. On the civilian_side; theGovernment has several concerns: It iS con!.cerned about levels of prOductivity, industrialwell-being, and economic growth, which influ-ence the standard of living of U.S. citizens, itis concerned about employment levels, whichinfluence the income distribution, tat reve-nues, and expenditures for aid to _individualsand regions; and it is concerned about equityissues, from occupational safety and health tothe balance of power between labor and Man=agement: The Federal Government thus rep=resents the interests of the Nation as a Whole.

The Reasons for a Federal RoleF-..:eral programs reveal ample

precedent for ederal involvement in the de-Veltipment and use of PA; In particular (andas deScribed in More detail below); the U.S:Government already has &major role in fund-ing PA research and ,lopment, and it of-fers tax incentives for capital investment thatmay motivate adoption ..-)f PA and ether equip-ment. Moreover, it is involved in study andregulation of occupational safety and healthimpacts generally; it measure: employmenttrends and relates ,her: in limited degree totechnological and economic developments; andit funds and shapes education, training, andretrainifig activities.

nature of existing programs, andat, :.-3me of the benefits and costs

.--..c.rue to the Nation as a whole; alsosuggt ti; 1-41..,.; the Federal Government_ has astake in the diffusion of PA. The level Of activ-ity- in PA production, for example, is anatiorialissue. There is a limit to the .;diit of PA pro=duction the U.S. P.:cor:Any wiu luppcirt (evenwith low levels of imports and snbstantial ex=ports. While policy at the State level foster=ing "high-tech' industrial activityvolve competition for a limited number. offacilities; only Federal policy can affect thelevel of PA production nationwide. Also in-ternational technological leadership, and itsimplications for national security, is a Federal

370 Computerized Manufacturing Auternatien: Employment; Education; and the Workplace

concern; at issue are goals ar,.i conditions thattranscend the interests and resources of in-dividual companies, reseal zhers, employees,and StateS.

Furthermore; there are equity issues WhiChthe Federal Government is best Suiteckto ad=dress. First; adjustment assistance whetherin the form of extended tmemploymerit Corn=pensation payments and other types Of incomemaintenance; retraining, or relocation assist=ancehas long been a Federal responsibility.If PA or other influences, such as rising irn-portlevels, have adverse_ employment effects,the Federal Government will eventually payto take care of individuals unable on their ownto adjust to changing job opportunities. Sec-ond, work environment impacts seem to besocial costs, like p011Ution, which market activ-ity on its own will not control.* The labormarket may be particularly ill-suited to han-dle both employment and work environmentproblems arising from PA in coming years forseveral reasons. In particular; the relativelyslow rates of net job growth that economistsexpect will reduce the numbers of choicesavailable to job-seekers,** Also; fear of dis-_

*According to Ruth Ruttenb-erg, former OSHA econoridat,"Occupational safety_ and health has beConie a public polityissue precisely because the economic system has failed toachieve an adequate solution to the problem of workplace haz-ards." "Regulation and the Economist;" The New York Times:Nov. 20, 1983.

"While the economy will experience post recessionary jobgrowth; strong import competition, a high Federal deficit, slowpopulation growth; and other factors are expected to constrain

placement and limited union representationwill diminish opportunities for workers to ne-gotiate with management about work;ng con-ditions or to seek other employment if dissat-isfied. If industry does not move to alleviateadverse effects on the work environment, theFederal Government is in the best position todo so.

Finally, only the Federal Government is ina position to coordinate policy initiativesacross,a broad range of areas. The problem ofcoordination is not trivial. Current programs,which lack formal coordination, implicitly fa-vor some interests over others by virtue of theallocation of funds and the breadth of partici-pation in developing program objectives. Spe-cifically, present programs IdescriW in detailbelow) appear to favor the interests of PA de-velopers and pr6ducers, and to a lesser extent,the users and their employees. For example,one Federal official involved with new-technol-ogy programs remarked to an OTA staff mem-ber, "I'm putting pople out of work. Am Isupposkl to worry about that?" While pres-ent policy allows programs to remain separateand parochial, only the Federal Governmentis empowered to assure that programs de-Signed to address one area of national interestdo not conflict with other national interests.economic uowth. for example: Alfred L. Male-bre, Jr.,

Some Economists Fear Room for Expansion is Less Than ItAppees;"Anid Alan Murray, "Growing U.S. Trade Gap isLinked to Slowdown in Economic Growth." Both in The WallStreet Journal, Feb. 17, 1984.

The Challenge of New PolicyThe diversity of issues and interested par-

ties surrounding policy related to program-mable automation suggests that Congressconsider action in a variety of areas. However,in developing new policy, it is important toconsider the context for actions in differentarenas.

OTA'S analysis suggests that the area wherePA itself may motivate the greatest departurefrom past Federal policy is work environment.Because PA will eventually affect the work en-vironment of most manufacturing personnel,especially in metalworking industries, andbecause it poses new problems pertaining to

38,,

the psychological aspects of the work environ-ment, the technology raises_qtrestions aboutthe adequacy of existing mecliW.Vsins for stud-ying, monitoring; and regulating conditions inthe work environment; While this report oxyconsiders effects on the manufacturing workenvironment; the growing use of compute:technologies across the economy may triggersimilar concerns in other sectors.

By contrast,_ while OTA's analysis suggestsnew diketitiii8 for Federal policy in employmentand training, it also suggests that PA-motivatedinitiatives be related to broader forces forchange in those areas. In the area of education;training, and retraining; OTA found that onlysome of the ramifications of PA could be iso-lated from the effects of increased use of newinformation and communication_technologiesgenerally across the economy; New technolo-gies will affect goals for instruction at alllevels, raising fundamental questions abouteducational objectives and the structure of theeducational system; At the same time, shiftsin the employment capacities of different in=dustries (not necessarily due to new tech,nology) may pose problein§ of obsolescentskills for specific occupational groups Or locallabor forces. These individuals, concentratedamong production occupations, have specialinstructional needs largely unmet by the in-structional system. Meanwhile, to minimizethe risk of skills obsolescence in the future, itmay be necessary to make fundamental changesin educational curricula and institutions;changes that better prepare individuals for la-bor market contingencies.

In considering employment policy, the prin=cipal problem associated with PA is how tominimize unemployment due to labor = savingtechnology and cope with employment adjust-ment without going So far as to postpone eco-nomic change and bring on problems far worsethan might otherivise have occurred. Unfor-tunately, thiS cannot easily be achieved byshifting people from jobs among PA users tojobs among PA producers. PA producer jobswill continue to be fewer and much more

Ch. 10Policy Issues and Options 37-i

L

"white collar" than typical manufacturingjobs have been. Moreover; because unemploy-ment cannot generally be attributed to specifictechnologies, the "PA employment problem"is really the broader employment problemfaced by the country as many factors, includ-ing growing import competition, are alteringthe employment potentials of different in-dustries.

OTA's analysis also suggests that issues per-taining to PA development and use reflect broadpolicy concerns for technology development andtransfer. PA provides tools for improving man-ufacturing processes and competitive strate-gies, but thorough evaluation of manufactur-ing processes, organization, and management,as well as more attention to competitive con-duct (including product designs; pricing, andresponsiveness to consumers), are necessaryif companies are to make the most effectivechoice and use of any technology. There aremany aspects of PA that require further de-velopment, but OTA found little evidence ofcritical research areas left unexplored, or thatmanufacturers were hindered from adoptingPA because of insufficient technological devel-opment. Of greater immediate concern is theapplication of the technology. Timing is an im-porta.nt consideration for PA adoption becauseproductivity improvement and other benefitsof more efficient equipment and systems tendto lag their installation.

Federal Policy StrategiesThe orchestration of policy initiatives in dif-

ferent areas may be considered a policy strat-egy. If the Federal Government chooses to co-ordinate activities in the areas of technologydevelopment and use, employment, work envi-ronment, and instruction, it can pursue one offour basic strategies: 1) laissez-faire, or a con-tinuation of current activities; 2) technol-ogy-oriented, or emphasis on PA developmentand application; 3) human resource -oriented,or upfront attention to education and train-ing, work environment, and job creation; or 4)

3 8 6

4.14r4CsAkdicti

372 Computerized Mancita ring Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

bOth technology- and human resource -ori-ented. In each case, adjustment assistancemay be required some time after the adoptionof PA, though to varying degrees.*

The outcomes of Federalction can be eval=uated accordirg to likely effects on industrialoutput; employment, work environment, andchange in adjustment assistance programs.The principal uncertainties that cloud projec-tions of change are: 1) the rate of advance ofthe technology, i.e., the likelihood that thestate of the art will advance far beyond whatis currently expected during this decade; and2) the relative success of efforts abroad todevelop or apply PA and to increase salespenetration in domestic and foreign markets;Another major uncertainty is economic growth;A stagnant economy creates numerous prob-lems which are best addressed directly; ratherthan through "PA policy;" although initia-tives discussed in this chapter may supporta healthy economy. Federal action can in-fluence all of these uncertainties;

The success of other countries in competingWith U.S. firma (whether due to PA or not) canbe a principal cause of lower industrial outputand employment for the country. A strategyWith at least some orientation to new technol-ogy development and use can reduce that risk,because it can contribute to improvements inproductivity and competitiveness; However;a strategy that is strictly technology-orientedwill probably increase the incidence of labormarket problems associated with shifting em-ployment demands; aggravating reeds for re-training and other adjustment services. Evenif greater use of PA were to make U.S. firmsdecisively more competitive; some firms maynever hire to prior levels; some areas may

*The need for adjustment assistance is ongoing; it will neverdisappear totally in a dynamic economy, where economic andtechnological change coritinly create dislocations: That neednormally varies in level, by geographic region, and over time.

depend primarily on such firms; and someindividuals may have difficulty adapting tochanging skill demands. Mso, a strictly tech-nology-oriented strategy is likely to aggravatepotential work environment problems. In sum,a strictly technology-oriented strategy wouldentail upfront costs for technology develop-ment and use, but it would also entail other,postponed costs such as increased adjustmentassistance spending.

A human resource-oriented strategy wouldinvolve investments in evaluating skill require-ments; tailoring education, training. and re-training activities; and assiating in the match-ing of people with jobs. Ideally, it should avoidgrowth in adjustment assistance spending dueto extended unemployment that might occurin the wake of PA, and it may even diminishsuch spending. Human resource developmentdoes not preclude and may well facilitate theuse of PA and otherwise improve productivity.However, its effects on industrial output leyelsmay not be as measurable as the effects oftechnology-oriented policy. Although humanresource and technology initiatives may com-plement each other in influencing output andemployment, explicit human resource effortsmay be needed to address work environmentconcerns, regardless of whether initiatives aretaken to accelerate PA pplication.

A combined techn gy- and human re-source-oriented st egy could draW on thecomplementarity of equipment and humans inproduction, assuring technology developmentwithout compromising work environment con-cerns. AlSo, it lends itself to long-term jobcreation initiatives. Thus, a combined technol-ogy- and human resource-oriented strategycould assure that human impacts are explicitlyconsidered in the processes of PA developmentand use. While this type of strategy is themost comprehensive and balanced, it may bethe most difficult to design and implementbecause it explicitly affects the broadest rangeof interests.

Ch. 10Pclicy Issues and Options 373

Existing Federal Policy andThe remaining portions of this chapter out-

line existing Federal policy in the areas of tech-nology development and use; employment,work environment; and education and train-ing. Each discussion of existing programs isfollowed by a set of options for possible poll-cymaking in each area. These options could becombined to develop one of the strategiesoutlined above.

Existing Federal Policy forTechnology Development and Use

Federal policy toward manufacturing tech-nology for new products or production proc-esses is piecemeal at best. Relevant programsp_ rincipally address research and development,although both macroeconomic policies andmore specific programs, such as tax credits,may indirectly stimulate technology changein manufacturing by encouraging capital in-vestment. Only in the area of defens-e procure-ment does the Federal Government activelycoordinate product and process technologydevelopment and application.*

As described in detail in chapter 8, Federalinvolvement in PA research and developmentcomprises the efforts of four primary govern-ment agencies with distinctly different man-dates. The work of the Department of Defense(DOD) and the National Aeronautics andSpace Administration is heavily mission-oriented, although it may have significantspinoffs for the commercial sector. However,by and large the commercial markets for newmanufacturing technologies tend to trail theGovernment (principally military) markets;The National Science Foundation (NSF) fundswork of a more generic nature; and the Na-tional Bureau of Standards (NBS) performssignificant_ generic work in its own labora-tories. NBS performs research in many areas

*Note that defense procurement technology_programs de-scribed in ch. 8 are also complemented by the provisions of theBuy America Act of 1933, which stimulates domestic procluction by promoting procurement of domestically made goods bythe Government.

Options for New Initiativesrelevant to PA; including standardization inlanguages and in interfaces bet*Teen corn,puterized tools; In addition; NBS' AutomatedManufacturing Research Facility, being con-structed with DOD funding assistance, is oneof the few full-scale test beds for computer-in-tegrated manufacturing concepts.

The Federal Government is also involved instandard-setting. Standards in the UnitedStates are generally developed on a voluntarybasis by vendors and consumers of specificproducts. The U.S. system of voluntary com-pliance with these standards contrasts withthe government-enforced standards of manyother countries; The role of the FederalGovernment; through NBSis largely to followand facilitate standards efforts, and in somecases perform supporting research.

Recent Legislative ProposalsLegislation has been proposed during the

first session of the 98th Congress to providedirect support to the manufacturing sector inthe United States; Many of these proposalsinclude mechanisms for promoting greatercooperation between business, labor, andgovernment for achieving national economicgoals; a common 'theme is creation of a newinstitution. Such proposals in lude:

The establishment of some type of Na-tional Technology Foundation or Boardthat would be charged with determiningpriorities for industrial development inthe United States; It would assess thecompetitive capabilities of U.S. industriesin order to direct national resourcesintothose areas which would improve U.S. in-__dustrial performance.Some type of National DevelopmentBank to finance the long-term develop-.trient of targeted industries.The formation of a National Robot andAutomated Manufacturing Leasing Cor-poration, which would facilitate the leas-ing of PA equipment.

374 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

A National Center for Industrial Technol-ogy, promoting dissemination of manu-facturing teChnology information.Special tax incentives for purchases ofautomated equipment.

Options for Technology Developmentand Diffusion Policy

Research and DevelopmentDrawing on the existing set of institutions,

Congress could act to increase PA_R&D by in=fluencing both the overall level of funding andthe distribution of funding to various agentieSand research topics. R&D contributes to thescope and level of technology available to theprivate and public sectors, and it contributesto the positipn of the country as a tachnologi-cal leader.

However, the degree of technological leader=ship to which we have become accustomed inthe post-war era may not be sustainable. ASone analyst notes:

Thus, our present situation is that in manyfields, America's earlier lonely eminence atnumerous technological frontiers haS givenway to a world in which other industrial na-tions have attained positions close to, or at;these same frontiers; In many-ways all thisshould be cause for rejoicing: We are no longerliving in the readily=identifiable aftermath ofthe most destructive war in history. Althoughwe area perhaps understandably, preocCUpiedwith the more purely competitive aspects ofthe situation, we need to be reminded thatcompanionship at the technologicel frontieroffers some considerable benefits as well ascosts.*Congress could act to maximize technolog-

ical leadership in pert by influencing both theoverall level of Federal R&D funding and the

-distribtition of funding to various agencies andresearch topics. The current environment forautomation R&D is relatively healthy. How-

*N. Rosenberg, Stanford University, "U.S. TechnologicalLeadership and-Foreign Competition, 'De te fabula narratur'?"November 1981, mimeo, National Academy of Sciences.

38 a

ever funding for more long-term, generic re-search in nonmilitary application areas is rel-atively thin. Congress may wish to raisefunding specifically for generic research, pri-marily through the National Science Founda-tion and National Bureau of Standards. Sev-eral of the measures currently underconsideration in Congress which increase Fed-eral funding for engineering research, overallor for automation in particular. could serve asa vehicle for such an increase in nonmilitaryPA research. The advantage of such a measureis that it could fill a gap in generic engineer-ing research which has usually been too ap-plied for major NSF funding and too basic forsubstantial industry attention. On the otherhand, some would argue that such manufac-turing-related R&D is the responsibility of in-dustry.

Congress may also wish to increase the fund-ing of specific areas of R&D, such as Stand=ards and human factors, which could facilitatethe application of PA teChnologieS. While a W-tailed assessment of funding allocationsamong the various topics of R&D is not withinthe scope of this OTA report, other studieshave begun to address this issue.'

StandardsStandards are a means of increasing the ease

of _use of the technologies and mcouragingtheir application The principal disadvantageof standards proliferation is the risk that morerapid adoption of standards may. provideshort-term benefits for users bUt hinder futuretechnological innovations which could be in-consistent with the standards. However, it isoften the case that the products of a dominantvendor become de facto standards in the mar-ket. An increased Federal role may lead to amore reasoned choice of standard. Congresscould stimulate standard-setting activities in

'See, for example: Research Agenda for Increasing the Useof Computers in Design and Manufacturing PETnel on Com-puters in-Design and Manufacturing, Manufacturing StudiesBoard, National Academy of EngineeringCctober, 1983; "Rec-orwnendations for CAD/CAM Research Directions in_theRichard F. Friesenfeld, Department_ of Computer Science,Univeraity of Utah, prepared for the National Science Founda-tion, July 23, 1982.

Ch. 10Policy issues and Options 375

the Federal Government by increasing or re-structuring the funding of NBS, the agencywhich administers Federal standards efforts.

Congress might also consider legislationwhich would clarify the legal position of stand-ards-making groups. Currently., groups whichhelp coordinate and oversee the intricate proc-ess of developing standards, such as profes-sional and trade associations, can be heldresponsible for antitrust violations which spe-cific standards may pose. A recent SupremeCourt decision finding against a professionalassociation appears to have significantlycooled private sector standards-making ef-forts, and it has helped make the process moretime-consuming than usual.2 While it is impor-tant that standards be devised so as to mini-mize potential anticompetitive effects; it maybe possible to clarify the laws to reduce theamount of time involved in establishing stand-ards.

In addition, Congress could consider pro-viding a more active role for the Federal Gov-ernment in standards development. Congresscould direct NBS to increase its current effortsto facilitate, coordinate, and otherwise pro-mote standard-setting efforts. A potentialdisadvantage of this option is that it wouldincrease the Federal role in PA markets;

DiffusionThe appropriate rate for adoption of PA

within and between industries is a subject ofcontention. It depends on the rates of adop-tion among U.S. trading partners, the extentof delay between invention and adoption ofnew technology, and the ability of the labor_force and industries to adjust. In the past,adoption of individual PA technologies wasslow, while it now appears to be accelerating.Thus, there is great danger in extrapolatingfrom past conditions. In this context, there isprobably a degree to which PA adoption canbe facilitated without incurring excess costs.Beyond some indefinite point, however, en-couragement of the use of PA may lead to ill-

'American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Inc. v. Hydro-level Corp., 456 U.S. 556, reh'g denied, 102 S.Ct. 3502 (1982).

25-452 0 - 84 - 25 : QL 3

considered applications and excessive prob-lems for employees and communities.

Congress could facilitate the adOPtion of PAby removing some of the barriers to applica-tion that have been cited by industry analystsand spokesmen. At the most general leyel,these barriers are the problems that industriestraditionally cite as a hindrance to doing busy.ness, such as high interest rates and (high) \taxes. Of course, such steps are not easy totake, ar d they may have side effects, includingthe creation of problems elsewhere due to theshort-run loss of tax revenues.*

Mores pe:ifically, Congress could considerlegislation that would help to make relevantinformation available to businesses and com-munities. In particular, information about thenature of PA technologies and how their costsand benefits differ from those of other equip-ment would be particularly useful. Traditionalmodes of financial analysis are more suited toconventional equipment than to PA, and inconsequence some firms have had difficultyjustifying investments in PA.** Moreover,while trade and professional associations andjournals do provide such information, that in-formation tends to be incomplete. Congresscould either empower a Federal agency suchas the Department of Commerce to increaseits efforts to collect and disseminate such in-formation (e.g., through the National Techni-cal Information Service (NTIS)), and/or fostercooperative arrangements between Federalagencies and relevant trade and professionalassociations. By complementing existing as-sociation activities with a Federal role, Con-gress could assure broader participation of

Overall economic policy nirecmt years has aimed at improv-ing- the performance of the U.S. manufacturing sector. Suchpolicies have inclucWd increasing depreciation allowances forbusiness investment in plant and equipment. The Economic Re-covety Tax Act of 1981 (ERTA) provided generous allowanceswhich were reduced somewhat in thei'ax Equity and FiscalResponsibility Act of 1982 (TEFRA). Despite these tax incen-tives, some analysts maintain that the large Federal deficit willcontinue to sustain high costs for capital.

**Conventional_ analyses often fail to capture changes_ in in-direct costs, which tend to be invariant for alternative formsof conventional equipment. PA equipment may not only affectdirect labor costs, but indirect labor, materials, and other costsas well.

390

376 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education; and the Workplace

interested parties; including employees andcommunities.

Also. CongreSS could consider sponsoringdemonstration programs, providing examplesof best practice in the areas of technology andwork environment. While PA installations inseveral companies are already well-publiaizedshowcases, a Federal role would increase thelikelihood that work environment and employ=ment issues are tlearly addressed and linkedto the technology. On the other hand, the tech=nology in any given installation can only rep-resent the state of the art for a limited timein the context_ of relatively rapid thange in PAcosts, applications experience; and seiphietica-don. Further, the investment and risk associ-ated with a typical; retrofit inStallation of PAis far less than that associated With, for ex-ample, a synthetic fuels plant ThUS, a demon-stration program for these tethnologies maybe less cost effective than for Stith technolo-gies as synthetic fuels produttion. This gapmay narrow, however, for largStale experi-ments in computer-integrat6d manufacturing,which are far more costly and risky than"islands of automation,"

Adoption of PA is only a partial solution toproblems_ faced by the manufacturing sector.

--:A longer term solution involves redreSSing thehistorical 'inattention, both of iiiduStry andgovernment, to manufacturing processes, or-ganization, and management. There is someevidence that this is happening already in theprivate sector; where international competi-tion appears to have generated a new aware-ness of U.S. wealniesseS. To assure that thisawareness translates into effective actions,Congress could dirett ftmding and efforttoward the development of engineering curric-ula in universities Which combinemanufactur-ing; design; and human resource managementactivities; as well as research in manufactur-ing- -g engineering topics.

'See, for example, Energy From Biological Processes (Wash-ington, D.C.: U.S. Congread, Office of Technology Assessment,OTA-E-124, July 1980). Synfuel plants have been estimated tocost in the $2 billion to $3 billion range, while highly automatedplants in dis-crete-manufacturitcg metalworking industries tendto-cost under $1 billion. LeVels of both technological and finan-cial risk are very high for sYnfuel plants.

393

Another approach with nearer term benefitswould be for Congress to foster the creationof some form of "manufaettiring institute,"perhaps building on the research centers al-ready_at NBS or at universities to provide afocus for manufacturing tethtiolOgy, hrganiza-

.bon, and management issues. Such an insti-tute could serve as an inforination clearing-house. The National Atadeniy of Sciences, forexample, recently recommended_ establish-ment of at leaat One joint DOD=U.S. machinetool industry research center to improve flowsof information supporting defense technologyneeds,' Yet, many observers_ believe that theneed for imprdVeMent in technology transferis greater in the civilian than in the defensesector. An institute tOtild serve as a think tankserving all ihdtiStrieS, with rotating fellow-ships bringing in people from throughout theManufacturing sector.*

The advantages of a manufacturing insti-tute would depend on its structure and man-date, A potential disadVantage of an institutewould be that it could become just anotherlayer in a complek network of Federal andprivate organizations. Mao, the designationof formal coordination requirements couldfreeze the extenSiire networking that alreadyoccurs informally. However, a Federal pres-ence could assure broader participation in thenetworking process.

Existing Federal Employment Policy(Excluding Training)

The United States already has a variety ofFederal employment programs and legislation.Most of the key pieces of legislation emergedduring the Depression era. Excluding educe=

'Manufacturing Studies Board, Committee on the MachineTool InduatrY, The U.S. Kfricliine Tool Industry and the De-fense Industrial Base, NationalAeademy Press, 1983-84.

*The National Science Foundation hai proposed a newgram for 1985 to create five to ten centers for interdisciplinarYengineering relearch. While these centers are in some ways sim-ilar to manufacturing institutes the relativelymodest levelof funding ($10 million for all five to ten centers), and the factthat they will not necessarily address topics related to manu-facturing, indicates that_ they will not be likely to substantiallychange the hiaterical U.S. inattention to manufacturing engi-neering.

Ch. 10Policy Issues and Options 377

tion and training programs; which are de-scribed later in this chapter; existing Federalemployment policy covers four broad catego,ries: 1) the development and distribution oflabor-market information, 2) income mainte-nance for the unemployed; 3) labor standardS,and 4) job creation.

Most Federal employment programs are ori-ented toward unemployment of relativelyshort duration; generally what is, referred toas cyclical unemployment; Also; over the pasttwo decades; Federal employment policy hascome to focus on aiding disadvantaged groupsof people (defined as low-income; or ehrOhleallYun- or under-employed). Consequently; currentprograms are not designed to accommodatethe more enduring unemployment that maybefall individuals and communities given wide-spread techhologieal change, growihg importcompetition; and long-tern' shifts in consumerbuying patternsunemploymeht generally re-ferred to as structural unemployment.

Compared to most European countries andJapan; labor market policy in the UnitedStates is reactive and uncoordinated; and itis not linked to other; industry-oriented pro-grams for structural adjustment in the na-tional economy; Since several recent reportsby the Congressional BtideetDffiee (CBG) andthe Congressional Researeh Service (CRS) et:amine Federal emplOyiheht policy inthis assessment Will eddies§ key feathres andrefer the reader to other analyses for moreinformation.

LegislationMajor employment policy in general evolved

from the following pieces of legislation: TheWagner Peyser Act of 1933 established_a frw,Public U.S. Employment &rvice (USES).USES (now called the Job Service in someStates) comprises a State-Federal network ofjob listing and placement services. Unlike itsforeign counterparts, however, USES does nothave legal monopoly on job referrals, powerto regulate competing private employmentagencies, or power to compel its use by em-ployers (except for Federal contractors).

Because of these limitations, during the post-World War II era, USES became an outlet forrelatively low-skilled, disadvantaged individu-als. This occurred through the proliferationof specialized, private employment agencieswhich tended to serve relatively high-skilledpersonnel; the combined burdens of budgetcuts and labor force growth;_ and the effectsof a policy shift in the late 1960's which ern-phaSized disadvantaged workers and which re-quired USES and Unemployment Insurance(See below) officials to assist in the adminis-tration of public assistance programs. Sincethe 1960's, employers and employees have as-sociated USES with welfare programs. Privateemployers consequently tend not to list open-ings with USES, except for lower skill, highturnover jobs. Thus, despite reforms and thedevelopment of computerized job banks, theUSES has continued to play a marginal rolein the labor market.5

The Social Security Act of 1935 establishedthe Unemployment Insurance (UI) system. Itis a program administered by a Federal-Statenetwork of agencies which now covers mostof the labor force. UI provides eligible personswith funds that replace up to 50 to 70 percentof their wages for 26 weeks. Associated ex-tended benefits (EB) and Federal supplemen-tal compensation (FSC)_programs provide ad-ditional money over longer periods of time.Ftmds are generated by employer and employ-ee contributions and disbursed through Stateagencies, with emergency allocations awardedon occasion by Congress. Labor-market an-alysts_ generally consider these and otherpayroll takes incentives for employers to layoff personnel if business declines; the availa-bility of unemployment compensation, togeth-er with the customary rehiring of laid-offpersonnel as business conditions improve, isgenerally-considered to retard job=searchforts among the unemployed. However, theU.S. program has significantly lower wage -re-

'The role of the USES and contrasts with its counterpartsabroad are discussed in a monograph by Mike Podgurriky ofthe Uniyergity of Maiiichukitta (Amherst), entitled "LaborMarket Policy and Structural Adjustment," Apr. 1. 1983.

392

378 Computerized Manufacturing AUTOMation: Employment; Education, and the Workplace

placement rates than Japan, Germany, France,and Sweden.6*

Some countries provide public assistanceto the long-term unemployed who have ex-hausted their UI benefits, and manyEuropeancountries provide "short-time" (part-time orpro-rated) benefits to allow worksharingamong firms and industries with reduced laborrequirements. Some States, Such as California,have recently begun similar worksharing pro-grams. The Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsi-bility Act of 1982 called for the Departmentof Labor to develop model worksharing legis-lation for States.

The Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938(FLSA) provides specific standards for wages(including a minimum wage and cox ertimerates) and hours of work. It also prohibits childlabor. FLSA covers primarily_non-professiona:and managerial personnel. While collectivebargaining in unionized settings provides ameans of assuring that wages and workingconditions are adequate, FLSA provides pro-tections in the form of minimum standards forwages and hours for all workers.** It was in-tended, in part, to prevent individual Stateeconomies from profiting in trade with otherStates through lower labor costs obtained bylow pay and/or long hours. According to ob-servers, however, monitoring and enforcementof labor standards in nonunion workplacestends to be limited. FLSA is complementedby other pieces of legislation governing wagesand hours of personnel employed by compa-nies doing business with the Federal Govern-ment. Those include the Walsh-Healy Act, theService Contract Act, the Davis-Bacon Act,and the Federal Work Hours Act (which setthe 8-day, 40-hour week as standard).

The Employment Act of.1946 established aFederal interest in the adequacy of employ-

°Ibid. Also. note that research by James Jonthow of the Cen-ter for Naval Analyses suggests that nonremtmerativaperson-nel costs (about half of which are fixed, mostly federally man-dated or training-related) flay account for about 23 percent ofmanufacturing employMeht casts.

*For more information on UI, see the analysis_ by CBO en-titled "Unemployment Insurance: Financial ConditiOn and Op-

tihna for Change," June 1983.**FLSA discourages, but does not prohibit. overtime.

ment opportunities. The Full EmploymentAct of 1978 expanded on theprinciples of the1946 act, requiring that the President dovelopeconomic policy consistent with the achieve-ment of full employment. Despite these legis-lative efforts to promote planning for themedium and long term, most employment poll--

cy and economic policy (fiscal and monetary)has focused on short-term objectives.*

Additional ProgramsThe legislation described above provides the

framework for Federal labor market policy.Additional Federal programs aim at creatingjobs, developing labor market information,and providing adjustment assistance beyondthe UI income support program.

Job Creation. Federal job creation activi-ties fall into two categories. First, variousmacroeconomic policies aim to improve em-ployment opportunities by stimulating aggre-gate demand (buying of various goods andservices by all types of consumers) and produc-tion activity. The effect of such policies is in-direct; relevant measures target interest rates,inflation, money supply, and disposable per-sonal income, which in turn affect productionand consumption activities by lowering costsand increasing budgets. While fiscal andmonetary policy can aim for long-term eco-nomic growth, steps tend to be taken to im-prove short-term prospects as the businesscycle changes. Macroeconomic policy is some-times complemented by specific, short-termprograms, such as the Public Service Employ;merit Program of the late 1970's and variouspublic works initiatives. Public -works initia-tives are recurrent themes in jobs legislationbecause of their countercyclical employmentpotential as well as their obvious appeal toconstituents in affected areas. The EmergencySupplemental Appropriations for Jobs Act of1983, for example, provided funds for a vari-ety of public works projects. Public works pro-grams can be designed to employ relatively

*The development and aftermath of-these laws are describedin detail in a recent CRS analysis. "The Employment Act of1946. as Amended, and the Opportunity for Economic Plan-ning: The Federal Government's Response," Feb. 4, 1982.

39j

Ch. 10Policy issues and Options 379

high- or /ow-skilled personnel, although con-struction projects tend to employ relativelyhigh-skilled personnel.

A more focused piograra is the TargetedJobs Tax Credit program This program; ini-tiated in 1978,* and amended by theEconomicRecovery Tax Act of 1981 and the Tax Equityand Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982, aimsat job creation for economically disadvantagedgroups. It provides employers with a percentof the earnings of a new hire in the form of atax credit. The program has two principalshortcomings: First, there is a risk that em-ployers will be paid for jobs that they wouldhave created anyway. Recent modifications tothe program are believed to have lessened thisrisk. Second, the program only applies to thosefirms that have tax liabilities, because thecredit is nonrefundable.**

Labor-Market Information. Various pro-grams aim to generate labor-market informa-tion (LMI), although the Federal role in thisarea has been decreasing The Department ofLabor administers the Federal-State LMI pro-gram through the Employment and TrainingAdministration, the Bureau of Labor Statis-tics (BLS), and the State Employment ecu-rity Agency (SESA) LMI units. The NationalOccupational Information Coordinating Com-mittee (NOICC) and the related State commit-tee (SOICC) network provide coordination,cooperation; and communication in develop-ing occupational infonnation. BLS, in particu-lar, provides information on aggregate, indus-try, and occupational employment and wagepatterns.

Because BLS has experienced sharp budgetcuts during the current administration, it hascut back on the volume and precision of theinformation it publishes. For example, becausethe sample size for 043 Current Population Sta-tistics survey haS been reduced, results forsmall areas (including the smallest States) and

!ft succeeded the New Jobe Tax Credit enacEed in May 1977.**These credits are discuss-ed in a recent analysis by CRS.

entitled "Jobs Legislation in the 98th Congress" (Issue Brief11383059).

minority groups are less accurate;* the elimi-nation of the labor turnover survey means theloss of a leading indicator of manufacturingexpansion and contraction; the elimination ofthe multiple jobholder supplement surveymeans the loss of a measure of the income ade-quacy of certain types of jobs; the eliminationof the Family Budget program means the lossof a measure of economic conditions; and thecutbacks in the economic growth, productivi-ty, and occupational outlook programs meanthe loss of detailed insights into the changingdeployment of labor in the economy.**

Adjustment Assistance. Finally, in addi-tion to the general employment programslisted above, the United States also has morefocused adjustment programs. Prominentamong them is the Trade Adjustment Assist-ance (TAA) program, launched by the TradeExpansion Act of 1962 and modified on sev-eral occasions, which has been the principalsource of aid for displaced workers. The UnitedStates is unique among developed countriesin distinguishing import-based displacementfrom other sources; European and Japaneseprograms encompass persons displaced by avariety of factors, such as new technology.Eligibility for TAA is limited to those who candemonstrate that they were displaced as a re;suit of imports, although the strictness of thetest has varied.

Due to strict eligibility criteria, TAA dis-bursements were negligible until the act wasamended in 1974. During the 1970's, criticsfaulted the program for delays in providingassistance, for emphasizing compensationover active adjustment assistance, for fundingpeople who eventually returned to their origi-nal employer, and for narrowly designatingwho was affected by imports (e.g., prime man-ufacturers but not firms whose principal busi-

*Sampling and inferences for minority groups have alwaysbeen suspect; the recent cutbacks aggravate a nonoptimalsituation.

**The nature and ramifications of these cutbacks are de-scribed in a detailed analysis of Federal statistical programsprepared by CRS, entitled "Ftecent Changes in the StatisticalActivity of the Federal Government." June 2. 1982.

380 Computimzed Manutadturing Automation: Employment; Education, and the Workplace

116§§ was supplying them). For example,- theGeneral Accounting Office found that relative-ly f w TAA participants used the relocationassistance feature; principallY betause partic-ipants were either unaware of the programor uninterested in it. The 1981 amendments(through the Omnibus Budget Rt.coriciliationAct) again revised the eligibility test, makingimports a "substantial cause" of job loss,while the 1982 amendthenta specified that im-ports shouldhave ithportantly"to job loss. The 1982 legislation provided verylittle funding, and the simple 2-year extensionof the program enacted in October 1983 pro-vided no funding.* 7

There have been several Federal programslegislated to provide cothpensation andlorother assistance to select groups of people inthe event of job loss resulting from Federalactions. These include the Redwoods Act of1978 (compensating for job loss associatedwith the expansion of the RedwOods NationalPark), the Rail Pasenger rvices Act of 1970and the Rational Rail_Reorganization Act of1978 (compensating for job loss associatedwith the rationalliation of the national railroadsystem foliciWing the financial collapse of sev-eral railiaada), the Airline Deregulation Actof 1978 (compensating for job loss associatedwith the:deregulation of passenger-airlines),and the Departnient of Defense's EconomicAdjustment Program (compensating for jobloss associated with changing defense spend-ing and siting decisions). Some analysts mightalso add such Federal efforts as theloan to theLOckheed Corp. and the loan guarantees to theChrysler Corp. during the 1970's as specialprograms aimed at averting massive Unem-ployment (among other goals). And, there arevarious efforts providing preferentialassistance to veterans (whose career devel-

retbitt CRS and CB0 publications address TAA. See,for example, the CRS paper: "Unemployment Compensationand Trade Adiustmeat ASSiStance: Changes Made by the 97thCongress," Nov. 23, 1982.

'See "Current National Developments," Employment andTraining. Reporter. Ott, 5, 1983; old -New Law Qualifies Morefor 'TAA', 'Ur," Employment and rrairringReporter, Nov. 3,1982.

3

opment is at least interrupted by militaryservice).

There are also programs targeted towardspecific areas, such as the Defense ManpowerPolicy #4, which encourages defense contractsto be awarded to labor-surplus areas. The AreaRedevelopment Act and its progeny also stim-ulated economic activity in specific areas, inpart to promote employment. Current interestin enterprise zones, favored by the Reagan ad-ministration, also focuses on area developmentto stimulate employment.

Recent Legislative ProposalsA variety of employment bills were intro-

duced during the first"session of the98theon-gress. The number and content of the bills re-fleet the strong concern about high levels ofunemplOyment, and uncertainty as to the du-ration of those levels; One bill (S. 1286, theMannfatturing Sciences and Teelindlogy Re-search and Development Act of 1983) appearsto have linked the developthent of new tech-nology with work farce adjustment. That billdirected the SecretarY of Labor to devise ex--perimental programs for retraining "displacedworkers" to facilitate the utilization of ad-vanced manufacturing technology. Other re:cent legislative 0-r-Opoaala regarding employ-ment include;*

4, eStablishment of a system of tax creditsfor employers who hire individuals eligi-ble for FSC payments, or provide taxcredits for people hiring for businesses inenterprise zone%establishment Of_Piiblic works programsof either specified or indeterminateduration;activities to stimulate employment ofspecific groups, including senior citizens,railroad employees, and employees of rela-tively small defense contractors;reforin of immigration laws and proce-&ire% which Would influence the supplyof labor to U.S. jobs;establishment of plant-closing notifica-tion and consultation procedures; andestablishment of a youth minimum wage.

Ctt 10POlicy issues and Options 381

Options for Employment PolicyOptions for employment policy range from

continuing current programs (the status quo)to adopting new measures in one of threegeneral areas: job creation, collection anddissemination of relevant information, and ad-justment assistance.

Status QuoThe programs outlined above (together with

the education and training programs describedelsewhere) constitute the status quo. As apackage, these programs provide relativelylimited Federal involvement . in long-termemployment change. They principally aim formaintenance of income for individual membersof the labor force who become unemployed, orfor employment of disadvantaged groups whotend to have difficulty obtaining jobs from theoutset. Also, they allow U.S. companies to relyon quick and massive layoffs (sometimes withplant closings) when business declines. Com-panies can achieve relatively quick, large-scalemovements of capital to more productive usesby closing unprofitable plants and building oracquiringmore productive facilities. However;this practice causes employees and communi-ties to bear most of the costs of economic ad-justment. In contrast; companies abroad (e.g.,large Japanese manufacturing firms) tend toadjust their work forces more slowly andthrough a wider range of measures.8 That con-duct involves slower movement of (and paten-tially lower returns on) capital resources, butdistributes the adjustment burden more even-ly among employees, managers, and investors.

Existing Federal labor market programsand institutions are ill-equipped to deal withlong-term shifts in labor demand arising fromtechnological and economic changes; andgrowing uncertainty in skill requirements;These factors may contribute to growth inlong-term unemployment; including extendedunemployment among groups other than the

"James A. Orr. Haruo Shimoda, and Atsushi Seike, "U.S.-Japan Comparative Study of Empoyment Adjustment," draft,U.S. Department of Latior and Japan Ministry of Latior, Nov.9, 1982.

disadvantaged. Similarly, they are not de-signed to deal with large regional disparitiesin unemployment. This is a concern since atleast the near-term employment effects of PAwill be concentrated regionally. Under thestatus quo, the employee would bear most ofthe burden of employment change associatedwith PA; various levels.of government bear,both directly and indirectly, some of the costsof unemployment that might occur.

Job CreationWhile retraining prepares a work force for

transition, job creation assures that peoplehave work to do. It is appropriate to considera Federal role in job creation, becausejob crea-tion programs at the State level may merelysharpen interstate competition for a givennumber of jobs, shifting the location of job op-portunities rather than generating new jobsoverall. Since most job openings occur to re-place departing personnel, past and proposedFederal programs for job creation aim to gen-erate new jobs that represent growth in eco-nomic activity. The principal problem indeveloping a program to stimulate job crea-tion is to avoid paying for jobs that employerswould have created anyway, and to avoidShifting employment from one industry toanother, either of which would diminish netjob groWth.* These prpblems have chronicallyplagued past public-Service employment andjob - creation incentive programs.

At the most general level, expansionarymacroeconomic policyincluding changes inthe supply of money, interest rates, and taxratescan lead to job creation by stimulatingeconomic activity, although job developmentis not restricted to specific industries orlocales. Also, macroeconomic_ policies thatstrengthen the dollar may make imports offectively less expensive than domestic prod-ucts, discouraging growth in U.S. production.

For example, a 5e per gallon Federal surtax on gasoline wasenacted through the Highway Improvement Act of 1982 to funda countercyclical public works program. When the legislationwas proposed critics charged that the added cost Of surfacetransportation would result in job losses elsewhere in the econ-omy. including jobs associated with the distribution of goodsby trucks.

39

382 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: EMploymiht; Education, and the 14>orkplace

At a lees general level, Congress can fosterand atm.& job creation primarily by legislatingspecific measures to stimulate hiring. In ad-ditiOiia tax credit programs such as the onealreid_y in effect, such measures include incen-tives for domestic production and, in the eventof persistent labor surpluses, legislation forChange in average work hours and increasedproduction of so-called public goods and serv-ices. These measures are discussed belo* ingeneral terms.

Congress can stimulate job creation by leg-islating financial incentives (or legislating anend to disincentives) for companies to produce(and buy supplies) within the United States;instead of overseas. The rationale for such in,centivee is that local production entails localemployment. Harrison and Bluestone, for ex-ample, estimated that over 30 million jobswere ost during the 1970's to plant closingsOverall, including the relocation of productionto overseas lcications. Other analysts havecome to similar -conclusions.° The risk of such

;incentives isthat they can encourage ineffi=eient production practices and lead to higherprices by sheltering domestic producerS fromcompetition from foreign .firms. Economictheory holds that where domestic productionis less efficient than production abroad, U.S.consumers will paypore for domestically prq:duced goods; also, they will pay for for-eign-produced goods whose availability is artstificially depressed, Consequently, preducersand consumers will have fewer resources avail-able to them to put to other useA. Employmentmay be sheltered in the short term but fore-gone in the long term. This argument is fre-quently raised by economists against importrestrictions such as tariffs and quotas.*

_ -

°Mary Jane Ekille-,2Thynt Closingsand Business Relocations,"CRS Issue Brief IB83152, Sept; 27, 1983.

*Note that there may lie noneconomic arguments forshelter-ing a domestic industry. Usually, those arguments center on na-tional securityon claims that there is a national interest inassuring domestic knowhow and production capability for cer-tain prodtietS, usually involving_defense-rdated technology. Thetest of national interest is a difficult one te.make, as_evidencedby the controversy over recent Houdaille and NMTBA petitient; for restrictions on machine tool imports.

Two types of job-creation programs mightbe considered in the face of persistent laborsurpluses. The first is legislation to reduceaverage working hours (either tied to FLSAor as independent legislation, perhaps de-Signed so that reductions in work hours aretriggered by certain economic conditions), andthe second would be legislation stimulatingproduction of so-called public goods and serv-ices. Products like defense or perhaps child=care, for which there is recognized publicmand which the private market is ill-suited orunable to meet, fall into this realm.

The chief benefit of reducing average workhours is that it would allow _a given amountof work to be shared among a larger group ofpeople. The number of jobs available is a func-tion of the (average) number of hours per job,as is the amount of leisure time available tocitizens. The tradeoff between jobs and hoursis not a new policy concept; one of the goalsof FLSA was,to increase employment by dis-couraging employus from resorting to-over-

) time work by requiring them to pay more forlonger hours. Both economic hardship (due tolow pay' and unemployment) and technolog-ical displacement_wert(concerns during theDepression era;...when FLSA was enacted.'°Another argument, first raised during-the late1970's, is that reducing work hours offers away; to avoid disproportionate job loss amongfeeaale and minority employees, who oftenhave relatively low leyels of seniority.

Reducing the average hours of work is notc=necessarily the same as "work-sharing," which

tends to involve the redistribution of existingwork. The difference is important in contem-plating income effects. A major perceived dis-advantage of programs that reduce work hoursis that individual employees may experiencereal wage losseS (See ch. 4). This is especiallylikely for work=Sharing. Broader distributionof work without growth in total wageswill notlead to the same generation of new jobs thatean result from growth in wages and spending.') c.

' °Irving Bernstein, The Lean Years (Boston: Houghton Mif-

flin Co., 1960).

39 /

Ch. 10Policy Issues and Options 383

Some people, however, will willingly trade re-duced work-hours and lower pay for increasedleisure time."

Changes in work hours may also cause busi-nessesnesses to incur additional costs for changingtheir operations and procedures to deal withgreater numbers of personnel and for increasedspending on frifige benefits. Firms may alsolose efficiency, if the workers "picked up"through work-sharing are not appropriatelyqualified.* On the other hand, companies mayface lower UI tax liabilities, which often risefor companies that lay off personnel. Also,work-sharing may encourage greater reduc-tions in force where there are administrativebenefits to doing so. For example, while a 10-percent cutback might satisfy a company's fi-nancial needs, a 20-percent reduction tied toa move to a 4-day work week may be easierto administer.

The actual costs and benefits of reducingwork hours depend on how a program is struc-turedhow funded, how phased in, etc. Thecurrent UI-system, for example, im_plies thathigher wage personnel would lose more thanlower wage personnel because UI replaces lessof their wages. Also, the experience-rating sys-tem, under which employers with worse rat-ings bear more of the cost of UI than others,implies that low-rated employers might effec-tively shift their work-sharing costs to highercost firms.

AlreLly, several States have provided fortemporarductioris in' work hours as ameans of preserving unemployment duringslack periods. These programs typically in-volve a reduction in work week for participat-ing companies and pro-rated UI benefits fornonworked days. While employees in declin-ing industries and areas may benefit in theshort term, longer term gains would requirea program with broad coverage that could helpshift people into stronger industries. This, in-

""20 Million Opt for Shorter Work WeCk,"Emptoyment andTraining Reporter, Nov. 16, 1983.

*However, unqualified workers may be less able to benefitfrom or afford work-sharing, insofar as employers resist hirtog thorn, or because the full time wages for their work arealready low.

turn, would It adjustment costs to a broad-er range ndustries and individuals andaway from communities and governments. Foreven distribution of costs and benefits, a na-tionwide, Federal program may be necessary.In the near term, Congress might at least con-sider further encouragement of temporaryhours-reductions and work-sharing, includingfacilitating necessary adjustments in UI andother programs to allow for altered terms ofunemployment."

Stimulating production of so-called publicgoods and services would also create jobs. Itis not a make-work option: The production ofpublic goods and services does not have to bemet by expanded public sector employment;as in the case of defense procurement, publicinvestment can stimulate private sector em-ployment. If the economy is incapable of employ-ing available labor resources in the productionof private goods and servicesa conditionthat has not yet been established conclusive-lyit is possible to increase production of.public goods without reducing production ofprivate goods. As employment grows, demandfor private goods may grow in turns shiftingthe balance between production of private andpublic gvods and services. An often unrecog-nized advantage is that public goods spending

. may raise proluctivity in private goods pro-duction. For example, highway building andimprovement can lower trucking costs andthereby reduce costs to the consumer, whilechild-care services can free-up parents for emp-loyment (as well as loyyer transfer paymentsfor unemployed, child-rearing parents).

The principal disadvantage of public goodsprograms historically has been the risk ofdiverting productive resources from privategoods proxluction. This charge has been lev-eled against defense _programs, for example,which support a handful of industries and tendto employ relatively high-skill personnel. Itwas also raised during the 1982 debate overfunding public works projects with an increase

!'Judith Cummings, "Novel Ways Being Used to Save Jobs,."The New York Times, Jan. 28, "))33, Also, as noted above,TEFRA mandated study of work ,luring by the Departmentof Labor.

39

384 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

in the Federal gasoline tax, which was ex-pected to reduce economic activity among abroad range of concerns depending on trucktransportation and other heavy users of gas&line.

Labor-Market InformationBecause programmable automation offers

the prospect of radical and ongoing changesin the deployment of labor, expanded collec-tion and analysis of occupational employmentdata would provide a means of measuring therate, extent, and direction of change withinand between occupational groups. At present;it is not possible to compare detailed occupa-tional data over short periods of time (e,g., 1to 3 years). Also, official analyses of the effeCtSof technology change on employment levelSand staffing patterns are few and far between.Better data collection by the Department ofLabor and the Bureau of the Census would im-prove the modeling exercises (using input=out-put analysis) already undertaken by thoseFederal agencies to describe and forecaat em-ployment trends, and it would improve the in-formation disseminated to educators, counsel-ors, and individuals by the Department ofLabor through the OccupationalOutlook Pro-gram and the Dictionary of OccupationalTitles. It would also providedata for measur-ing "best practice" among firms in deployinglabor, information that would be useful tomanagers, labor organizations, and educators.

As Federal statistics programs have beencut back during the past few yearS, debateover the appropriate Federal role in the gather-ing and disseminating of various forms of datahaS grown. The minimalists hold that Federalefforts should be confined to meeting the spe-cific needs and priorities ofgovernment agen-cies. Their arguments are rooted in broaderinterests in deregulation and reducing govern-ment paperwork required of businesses. Sup-porters, by contrast, argue that agency needsand priorities change and are hard to predictor circumscribe; that private sources lackthewherewithal and authority of the Federal Gov-ernment for collecting data; that there is aneed for statistics that describe overall social

and economic conditions across the Nation;and that there is a need for the Federal Gov-ernment to provide citizens with inforrnation.'3Limited funding for Federal statistics pro-grams forces Federal agencies to channel re-sources to those activities of most immediateuse by the Government, Such as statistics de-scribing overall employment and economicperformance characteristics. This practiceserves short-term information needs, butraises questions about the effectiveness ofeven the favored programs in the long term,because the most -u-Sed aggregate statistics de-pend on more detailed data-gathering, analy-sis, and modeling.

Adjustment Assistance (Excluding Training)

Public attention to EVderal activity in ad-justment assistance is growing because manyStates are affected; State§ are competing forjobs; and growing numbers of potentially af-fected workers are not covered by collectivebargaining. Becaube those displaced by pro-grammable automation are likely to have beenat risk of displacement from other factors suchas rising imports, expansion of overseas pro-duction, and plant closings generally, any Fed-eral program of adjustment assistance wouldbest be provided as part of a broader programto assist the long-term displaced; as experiencewith the Trade Adjustment Assistance pro-gram shows, it is difficult in practice to isolatesingle causes of displacement for determiningeligibility for program participation.*

"Daniel Melnick, "Recent Chfingea in the Coordination of Fed-eral Statistical Data Collection.," Congressional Research Serv-ice; Sept. 18, 1982.

A broad range of options for adjustment assistance pro-grams has been evaluated in detail in recent publications byCBO. including "Ditiltitated Workers: Issues and Federal Op-tions" (July 19821. As noted by CBO, a critical problem in struc7tering adjustment assistance prograths is defining the targetgroup. How eligibility for assistance is definaddetermineswhether a program covers all categories of Affected personnel(!!vertical equity") all people affected within categories("horizontal equity*l_Different criteria have different implica-tions for client base size, cost, and coverage of people with yaping capabilities for adjusting on their own. Table 74 ShOWS theCBO compariiiin of different approaches to targeting adjust-ment assistance. Ameng the categories discussed in debatesover' programs (excluding retraining) for displaced workers in-elude older workers (age 40_ and older), workers in so-calleddeclining ladusteies; and workers in disadventaged areas (in-cluding new entrants to the labor force).

39 u

Ch. 10Policy Issues and Options 385

Table 75.Sensitivity of Estimated Numbers of Ditiocated Workers In January 1983 to Alternative Eng NiftyStandards and Economic Assumptions

Eligibility criteriaNumber of workers

High trends Middle trend° Low trends-

Single criteria:Declining industry° 1,065 880 835Multiple criteria:Declining industry and other unemplOyed in de-dining areas 2;165 1;785 1,700Declining occupation 1,360 1,150 1,095Ten years or more of job tenure 835 710 675More than 45 years of age 1;050 890 845More than 26 weeks of unemployment 1 760 560 535Declining industryd and ten years of job tenure 275 225 21545 or more years of age 250 205 19526 Weeks of unemployment ... . ......... . 145 110 100

Declining industry including other unemployed in.declining areas°and ten years of job tenure 430 355 340

45 or more years of age 490 395 37526 weeks of unemployment 330 255 245

Declining occuiation and f ten years of job tenure 235 195 185

45 or more years of age 335 280 2652¢ weeks of unemployment 165 120 105aHigh trend assumes continuation of March 1980 to December 1982 growth rates in the number of unemployed workers In each category. Specifically, the numberof workers unemployed from declining industries Increased by 32 percent In this period it monthly Ave/agent 1 4 percent. -

bThe Vend assumes that the number_ot_dillketed_w_OrkerS will_remsi_n_constant from December 1981 to January 1983. The number of dislocated workers InDecember 1_9811S estimated bY adjusting March 1980 Current Population totals for changes in the level and composition of unemployment through December1981.

cThe low trend assumes that the number of dislocated workers In each category-decreases proportionately-with the projected change in the aggregate number of--unemployed workers between the first quarter of 1983 and the first quarter 61_1983.-aTeAuction_ol_neatly_5_percent, _

0The declining industry eategery InelUdet_all [ObtOserStrom iftdustries_withdeelining employment levels from 1978 to 1980. See Marc Bendick, Jr., and Judith RadllnsklDevine, "Workers Dislocated by_ Economic Change: Is There A Need for Federal Employment and Training Assistance?"

elf a declining industry was located In an area defined as declining, alt other lob losers in the area Afore included. Declining areas are defined as those experiencingdeclines In population from 1970 to 1980 or with an 8.5 or higher perekLUnernpirtyrne_ntrate_in_M_ar_Cli 1980._ _

1The &kilning occupation category Includes all job losers from occupations with declining employment levels from 1977 to 1980.SOURCE: Congressional Budget Office, based on tabulations from the March 1980 Current Population Survey and Other sources noted above.

While the debate over aid to displaced work-ers overall tends to focus on external aid, suchas income maintenance or relocation assist-ance, the spread of progranunable automationraises questions about the role of employers"in the adjustment process. Two employer ac-tions in particular might be encouraged by leg-islation. The first is advance notice of tech-nological change and displacement, and thesecond is incentives for replacement of person-nel by employers.

Advance notice of technological changeallows workers to plan for change, evaluatetraining needs, and seek new work before a re-duction in force is put into effect it also allowsmanagement; communities, and labor to worktogether to ease the adjustment process.Nevertheless, companies often resist provid-ing advancemotice as an extension of the viewthat technological change is a managementprerogative. The University of South Florida,for example, reports that its robotics experts

. .have been asked to perform robot feasibilitystudies with the proviso that "under no cir-cumstances are employees to find out.'"` Adisadvantageborne by companies is that keypersonnel will often be the first to leave,possibly putting future operations in jeopardy.This concern has been a central argument inopposition to plant-closing legislation and tovoluntary resignation (buy-out) programs.

Encouraging employers through fmancial in-centives to re-place personnel either within_ oroutside of the firm is another option. This op-tion, like job creation, increases the adjust-ment burden on companies relative to employ-ees, communities, and local labor markets. Itmay stimulate cooixrative activities amongindustry, local government; educators, andlabor, perhaps building on efforts associatedwith the Jobs Training Partnership Act. Onthe other hand; it is primarily feasible for large

I"' USF Engineers Extetadibg_Robets' Limited Capabilities,"Sue Stremmel, Oracle, June 15, 1983,

'4 0 0

386 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

employers, especially those with multiple fa--

cilities, broad product lines, and adequatetraining facilities and funds.

Existing Federal WorkEnvironmefit Policies

The Federal Government already has poli-__cies that regulate the work environment, suchas legislation covering wages and hours andoccupational safety and health. These samepolicies will apply to the introduction and useof PA in manufacturing, although they maynot be adequate to meet new concerns.

LegislationThe principal safety statute relevant to pro-

grammable automation is the OccupationalSafety and Health Act of 1970. It has as itspurpose to "assure so far as possible ,everyworking man and woman in the nation safeand healthful working condition§ and to pre-serve our human resources." Under the provi-sions of the act, the Department of Labor isresponsible for promulgating and enforcing ix-cupational safety and health Standards. TheOccupational Safety and HealthAdministra-tion (OSHA) was formed in April 1971 withinthe Department of Labor to implement theOSH Act. Additional legislation addressesworker safety in mining and atomic power en-vironments. Traditionally, safety and healthconcerns in the workplace centered mainly onsafety and protection from the most obviousexposures to toxic chemicals and other dan-geroua substances. More recently, greater em-pha§iS has been placed upon occupationalhealth, long-term exposure problemS, jobstress, and toxicological problems."

Other laws fo-cua on how, employees andmanagement may address work environmentconcerns. The National Labor Relations.Act(NLRA) was passed in 1935 to encourage thepractice of collective bargaining. The act wasamended in 1947 (Taft-Hartley Act) and againin 1959 (Landrum-Griffin Act). The NLRA and

"Steven Deutsch, "Extending Workplace Dem &racy: Strug-gles to Come in Job Safety lurid Health," Labor Studies Jour-nal, vol. 6, No. 1, Spring 1981, p.?

its regulations govern the conduct of collec-tive bargaining in the United States._With re-spect to the introduction of new technology,rulings to date by NLRB suggest that it is bar-gainable if the technology deprives employeesof jobs, work opportunitieS, or otherwisecauses a real change in working conditions."Thus, the introduction of new technology maybe treated similarly to decisions on whetherto contract out work. Since the collective bar-gaining process directlybenefits,only,workersin unionized settings, these protections maybe lacking for workers in nonunion plants. Theissue of coverage is inwortant because, al-though unionization is relatively high in themetalworking industries, the use of program-mable automation is increasing in a broad mixof industries. With current estimates of unionmembership in the United States totaling be-tween 20 and 25 percent of all workers at most,there is a large segment of the population thatwill not be protected by the process of collec-tive bargaining.

The Department of Labor administers pro-grams to encourage labor-management coop-eration on a number of issues. These progrEanstake place in union and nonunion settings. Pro-visions are sometimes made in contracts forjoint labor-management safety committes thatmeet periodically to discuss safety problems,to work out solutions, and to implement safetyprograms in the plant." Insofar as labororganizations or-workers perceive technologyas a health issue (e.g., if there is substantialevidence to suggest that new forms of machine_monitoring and pacing of work are unhealthy)labor representatives may push for measuresto protect workers against, such hazards.

Other ProgramsThe Department of Health and Human

Services, through the National Institute forOccupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), is

1 Sin Automation and the Workgface: Selected Labor, Sduca-don, and Trainins IssueS (Washington, DC.11.1.S; Congress, Of-fice of Technology Assessment, OTA- TM- CIT -25, March 1983),p. 55;

"CharacterisUts of Major Collective BargainingAgreements,Jan. 1, 1980.

4 01

Ch. 10Policy Issues and Options 387

responsible for recommending new standards,conducting research on which new standardscan be based,- and implementing education andtraining programs for producing an adequatesupply of manpower to carry out the purposesof the act. In addition to Federal involvementin the protection of workplace safety andhealth, there are agencies responsible at boththe State and local levels as well..

Options for Work Environment PolicyCongressional policy considerations with re-

spect to the effects of programmable auto-mation on the work environment fall largelyin two areas. One is assuring that sufficientdata are available to make informed judg-ments about current or prospective impactsof PA on workers and the workplace. The sec-ond area is determining whether current policyis sufficient to cover the health and safetyaspects of the new technology. If CongressdC,cideS to act in these areas, options that war-rant consideration include: maintaining thestatus quo, monitoring the workplace effectsof PA more closely, increasing support for"social impacts research, supporting new work-place standards, and considering broaderworkplace legislation.

No Increased Federal RoleCongress could choose to take no additional

action on the workplace effects of PA. Al-though no single policy instrument spcificallyaddresses the impacts of PA on the work envi-ronment, various mechanisms (including col-lective bargaining, OSHA regulations, andothers) are already in place at the Federal,State,_ and_locaLlevelq that caver_workplaceconcerns in general, particularly in the areasof health and safety. In addition, PA is beingintroduced at a time when there is increasingawareness of and sensitivity to the effects ofthe introduction of new technology in all facetsof American life.

There are some efforts in both the public andprivate sectors to plan for the workplace con-sequences of new technology, sometimes in-

volving both management and labor. Suchcooperative efforts are often tied to broaderquality of work life programs and increasedworker participation in decisions that affecttheir workplace. Two examples of joint effortsinclude arrangements between AT&T and theCommunications Workers of America, and be-tween the _United Auto Workers and orMotor Co. Such-programs are often restricted,however, to large, unionized companies. Sim-ilar opportunities. may not be available tti-workers in small shops or nonunionized envi-ronments, primarily due to the requirements-for associated time, effort, and cost . In addi-tion, it is often the case that the traditional,adversarial postures of management and la-bor limit increases in cooperation and workerparticipation in decisions concerning increasedautomation. Concern for the displacement ef-fects of PA may make employees reluctant tocontribute to planning for PA.

The principal advantage of maintaining thestatus quo rather than initiating additionalpolicy at this time is that congressional actionon the workplace effects of PA may be prema-ture. The technology and its applications areat an early stage of development, and thespeed of its diffusion is uncertain. It is alsodifficult to know how many of the problemsencountered in the workplace are transitionalones characteristic of any technologicalchange. Consequently, there is a lack of dataon the nature of the impacts of PA, especiallyover the long term The information that existsis largely qualitative or anecdotal and oftencannot be generalized for industry- or sector-wide responses.

Reliable information is critical if the OSH-Act is to serve as the basis for PA-relatedwork environment policy. The OSH Act is anenforcement statute which is implementedthrong-1i investigations and measurements.While physical safety and health conditionstend to be relatively easy to measure objet-__tively, psychological conditions are often lessso. -Broadening the scope of investigationswould require additional investigator. skillsand procklures for which data on PA impactswould provide a foundation.

402

388 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

.Additional Government action beyond the

status_ quo could create mechanisms to collectdata that would allow a more careful evalua-tion of the impacts of PA on the work environ-ment, thereby permitting better planning toeliminate potentially serious problems. Bothreliable data and better planning would con-tribute to a more focused development of pol-icy initiatives over time; as appropriate. With-out such Federal action, information on PAand the work environment will continue to bepiecemeal and fragmentary, and anecdotalrather than quantitative. If use of the tech-nology spreads more rapidly than expected,the United States may find itself reactingto the workplace effectS of PA, rather thanplanning in advance to address its potentialimpacts.

Increase OVerSiglit and Monitoring

Congress could increase the emphasis placedon the workplace effeets of computerized man-ufacturing automation through its oversightand monitoring activities. Considerable atten-tion has been given to these issues by a num-ber of congressional=eommittees over the pastseveral years, Partietilarly in oversight hear-ings; For example, in September 1981; theSubcommittee on Science, Research; and Tech-nology of the HoiiSe Committee on Seience

. and Technology sponsored_ a series of hearingson "The Human Factor in Innovation and Pro-ductivity" which focused on new technologyin the workplace.*

This type of activity increases the visibilityof the subject and provides a public forum forinformation-sharing and presentatiOn of di-verse viewpoints._ In addition to its own over-sight activities, Congress could deSignate re-sponsibilities for OSHA and NIOSH, such asmonitoring and assessing the effects of PA onthe work environment or evaluating the appli=-cability of existing OSHA standard§ to com-puterized settings.

The advantage of this option is that it wouldprovide a Federal approach to monitoring and

*The Congressional Research Serviceproduced a committeeprint analyzing the testimony and discussion.

assessing the impacts of PA on workers in alltypes of manufacturing settingsunionizedand nonunionized, large and small. In addition,it would help to assure that Congress is keptaware of the most current thinking with re-spect to the impacts of PA on the work force.The principal disadvaritage is that it couldpotentially result in a piecemeal effort with lit-tle or no coordination of activities or Sharingof information. Thus, designation of author-ity, participation criteria, and accountabilitywould be necessary in the design of an over-sight and monitoring initiative.

Increage Support for WorkEnvironment Research

Work environment ramifications of the useof PA are central to both its effectiveness andits other impacts. Congress could support re-search addressing such areas as the long -andshort-term physical and psychological, effectsof PA, management strategies and policies inintroducing and using PA, worker participa-tion, identification of hazards and how tocontrol them, skill changes, change§ in workcontent and organization, and changes in or-ganizational structure, among others. Widedi§Semination of the results would improve thegeneral level of understanding of practicalways in which PA technologieS can be usedto enhance the work environment. Researchefforts could also lead to the development ofmodels or guidelines for installations with fa-vorable effects on the work environment whichcould be used by those who are contemplatingor making changes. Demonstration projects,seminars, and experiments would enhanceunderstanding of the effects of PA and theextent to which? it:can be shaped to improvethe work environment.* Congress also couldassure that all parties ;involvedmanagers,employees, educators, and equipment build-erswould have timely access to relevant in-formation.

*Topics covered might include successful implementation ef-forts (and the other side of the cointhose that were not suc-cessful and why), innovative ways to organize work, and suc-cessful labor-management cooperative efforts.

Ch. 10Policy Issues and Options 389

Current research intoThe impacts Of PA onthe manufa-turing work environment is mod-est in scope and support; funds fOr this pur-pose have been extremely limited. This situ-ation has_ arisen in part because social scienceresearch furidingia particularly Vulnerable toreductidn when fiinda are scarce. It has alsoarisen because work environment issues havetraditionallY not been major concerns to tech-nology developers, industry, or even the socialscience research communities. Relevant re-search conducted by industry, universities,unions, and Government agencies_ is oftenpiecemeal and short term. Human factors re-search, for example, is often narrowly definedto meet the performance needs of specific mil-itary for industry) projects. Not surprisingly,therefore, there is no formal coordination oftechnology and work environment research ef-forts, nor evidence of a coherent plan or ap-proach. By contrast, study of the impacts ofnew technology on the workplace is more Com-mon in Japan and Western Europe, where thesubject has histbrically received more_atten=tion across sectors; In particular, many foreigncountries combine work environment analysiswith engineering research. TO learn from theirefforts and experienee, Congress could directan agency such as the Departinent of Laborto both survey relevant foreign activities and,in particular, to translate and disseminateforeign rep-ortS. However, recent cutbackshave already affected relevant research activ-ities in the Emplbymerit and Training Adrrun-istration and elsewhere in the Department ofLabor.

Additional or redirected funding could bemade available for activities administered bythe National SCience Foundation, NIOSH, theDepartment Of Labor, or DOD to enable re-searchers to &induct both qualitative andquantitatiVe research to determine the extentOf the impacts of PA on the workplace; NSFwould be in a position to extend the scope ofreleVarit engineering research to include thesocial aspects of PA. It already funds sepal-,ately relevant social science research. NIOSHcould provide a perspective that would linkand compare the safety and health aspects of

PA to other occupational safety and healthissues. The Department of Labor would be ina position to link the impacts of PA to otherlabor issues. DOD has already lobked at somehuman factors issues in their ManTech pro-gram. In addition to individual agency efforts,increased interagency coordination of researchefforts would have the advantage of combin-ing g the expertise of _a_ variety of disciplines,e.g., engineering, sOtiology, and management.

In contemplating the Federal research budg-et, Congress may want to assure that workenvironment research; in/particular, involvesindustry; labor; and academia together. Coop=erative efforts provide academic researchez-swith access to a valuable source of data foranalysis of long-term effects, while industryand labor may benefit directly from the find=ings in the short and long terms. Cooperativeprograms for research carried out over a periodof time rather than accomplished in a one-timevisit would be particularly informative to pol-icymakers. Such research might be supportedby any of the agencies listed above.

One disadvantage of increased funding forsocial impact research is thepotential burdenit might place on companies and individualsto respond to requests for in-depth studies.Some strategy for securing the cooperation ofboth labor and management would be neededto minimize potential burdens. The participa-tion of professional and trade associations aswell as labor organizations in the planning and.execution of such research could help in over-coming some of the difficulties that mightarise in gaining access to research sites.

New StandardsBoth the framework and the mandate exist

in the OSH Act for safeguarding occupationalsafety and health of Americans. If it were es=tablished that PA creates new occupationalsafety and health hazards that were not ade-=quately addressed by manufacturers andusers, new OSHA standards might be required.The previous two options, monitoring and ad-ditional research, are prerequisites to this op-tion. Reliable information would be needed on

40

390 Computerized ManUfw.turing Automation: employment Education, and the Workplace

the numbers of people at risk, on the natureof the risks, and on the costs of establishingnew regulations.

Advance NoticeCongress may wish to propose legislation

that would require employers to give advancenotice of any technological change that will af-fect the working conditions of its employees.A number of union contracts include a clausecovering such notice, and such clauses are be-coming more common. Legislation would etpe-cially benefit and protect employees of firmsthat are not unionized. Advance notice canbenefit employees by providing time for themto plan for the change (possibly in cooperationwith employers, communities, and educators)and to update their skills if required; it pro-vides employees with the means and the re-sponsibility to plan for change. It also pro-vides the opportunity for employees toparticipate_ in some of the decisionmaking thatdirectly affects their work, if employers wishto involve-them-in-this way. While advancednotice of technological change might he as con-troversial as advance notice of plant closings,the potential costs for Workers and managerswould likely be smaller. (Ste above discussionunder employment policy.)

Omnibus Work Environment LegislationAlthough the United States already has a

statutory framework for protecting occupa-tional safety and health, other aspects of theintroduction of new technology in the work-place, such as the potential for monitoring andsurveillance and the need for advance noticeof technological change, suggest the desirabil-ity of taking a broader approach to work envi-ronment policy. In addition, a broader ap-proach would ensure that the interests of allworkers would be protected, given the limitedcoverage of collective bargaining.

A number of European countries have takenan omnibus approach to workplace concerns.In Norway and Sweden, for instance, workenvironment legislation has been in effectsince 1977. One of the purposes of this legis-

lation is to protect workers' mental as well asphysical health in the workplace, particularlyin the context of technology change, and togive employees an opportunity to influence thedesign of the work environment. Such legisla-tion elevates these concerns to policy levels,and provides a framework for more concreteactions, such as those described below.

An American approach to legislation hasbeen proposed by the International AssOcia-don of Machiniste, which has drafted a Tech-nology Bill of Rights to "amend and redefineofficial labor policy" (see table 52).18 In addi-tion to advocating the use of new technologyto promote full employment, this proposedmeasure includeS such work environment safe-guards as prolilbiting monitoring and surveil-lance of workers, advance notice of technolog-ical change, and requirements for training. TheTechnology_Bill of Rights has been made avail-able by IAM to local unions for guidance incollective bargaining. Because of its breadth,however, if such a Bill of Rights were enactedas an amendment to U.S. labor laws, enforce-ment would be difficult.

Workplace _legislation could establish a clearinstitutional focus for work environment con-cerns to enhance the general appreciation ofthese issues and their contribution to the econ-omy and society. One example of such_an in-stitution is the Swedish Work EnvironmentFund, which provides funds for research anddevelopment in the work environment, ad,dressing aspects of both physical and mentalhealth. Its function is to collect and dissem-inate information, and to coordinate relevantprogram efforts. Financial support isprovidedby a variety of sources, includirtg the govern-ment, employers, and Workers. Such An inati-tution might be considered for the UnitedStates; which presently haS only limited in-stitutional involvement in the work environ-ment area, concentrated on protection of physical health and safety.

The principal advantage of an institution ofthis kind is that it provides a coordinated

""Let's Rebuild America," IAM, p. 195.

4 d

Ch. 10Policy Issues and Options 391

focus for workplace researcll?, and it establishesthe workplace as an area of national concern.It would help to overcome much of the frag-mentation of workplace research efforts cur-rently evident in the United States by providinga central thrust and source for disseminationof information, demonstration projects, etc.

Existing Federal Education Training,,

and Retraining PolicyAt present, instruction for PA is funded

through a variety of public and private sources.Federal funding of education, training, andretraining efforts of this type is authorizedunder broad legislation designed to encouragecareer awareness and occupation-related in-struction on the elementary, secondary, andpostsecondary levels.

The Federal role in education has tradition-ally been that of supplementing or enhancingState and local activities. However, in recentyears, there has been a movement toward less-ening direct Federal involvement with theestablishment of educational block grants toStates in place of _categorical grant§ targetedfor use with particular population groups orin speciffe types of programs. In spite of thistrend, there are still many Federal laws thatinfluence curriculum content and overall op-erations of local school systems and institu-tions of higher learning.

In contrast, the Federal role in training andretraining effortsparticularly for the eco-nomically disadvantagedhas been a domi-nant force since the 1960's. The enactment ofthe Manpower Development and Training Act(MDTA) and the establishment of a nation-wide apprenticeShip system did much to en-hance the existing delivery system for train-ing and retraining. In keeping with the trendtoward decentralization, the recently enactedJob Training Partnership Act (Public Law 97-300) assigns resgonsibility for administrationand regulation of federally fundmi training andretraining activities to the States.

For the purposes of this report, this sectionwill briefly discuss in general terms selected

25-452 0 84 26 a QL 3

Federal laws and proposed legislation that arepresent or potential sources of support for PAinstructional programs.

LegislationElementary, Secondary, and Vocational Ecr-

ucation.The Education Consolidation andImprovement Act of 1981 (ECLA) called forthe creation of a block grant to States in lieuof over 40 separate categorical grants toelementary and secondary schools, many ofwhich were directed at special populationssuch as the handicapped and the economicallydisadvantaged. The intent of ECIA is to af-ford greater flexibility to State agencies and10-cal achobl systems in how Federal funds willbe utilized in support of State and local pri-oritida. The major criticism of the EducationalBiotic Grant Program is that numerous Stateand local educational -3riorities must competefor the same funding pool. Funding authorizedunder thelVocational Education Act of 1963legislation now being considered for reauthor-ization beyond 1984 represents approximate-ly 10 percent of the resources. State and localeducation agencies designate funds for second-ary -and postsecondary vocational educationand training.19 Funds' made available under theact are utilized by -a variety of institutions, in-cluding vocational/technical schoblS operatedby local school systems, State=operated shillscenters, and community colleges. Among thetypical expenditures allowable under Statc-administered vocational education programsare facilitieS maintenance and improvement,equipment purchase, and curriculum devel-opment.

Postsecondary Education. The Higher Ed-ucation Act of 1968 authorizes Federal fundsfor use by public and private colleges and uni-versities to supplement tuition proceeds, Statefunds, and private donations or endowments.Allowable expenditures under the act includefacilities maintenance and improvement,

"Daniel M. Saks, "Jobs and Training," Setting NationalPriorities: The 1984 Budget (Wvsldngton, D.C.: The BrookingsInstitutien, 1983), p. 165.

406

392 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, EdUCatibil, and the Workplace

equipment acquisition; and curriculum devel-opment.

Since the 1960's, the Federal Governmenthas operated Student Financial AssistancePrOgrama=aniong them the Guaranteed Stu-dent than Program (GSL) and the Pell Grants;The original intent of these programs was toprovide broader access to higher education forindividuals from low- and middle-incomefam-iliea. However, increased default rates and con-certi for overall program expenditure. levels($3.1 billion in fiscal year 1983) led to recentcongressional action to tighten eligibility byrequiring all applicants to undergo finanicialneeds analysis, regardless of income. The PellGrants; the largest of the student financialassistance prograrms;_is also currently tinder;going reevaluation; .,Both GSL and the PellGrants have been sources of financial assist-ance to students enrolled in public and privatecolleges and_ ithiVersities and postsecondary,proprietary business, and technical schools.

Private Sector Training and Retraining.The recently enacted Job Training Partner-ship Act (JTPA) replaced as of October 1;

/ 1983, the Comprehensive Employment andTraining Act (CETA) as the legislation

i authorizing Federal involvement in Occupa-tional training and retraining. JTPA repre-sents an expanded version of title VII of theCETA Amendxnents of 1968, known as the"Private Seem Initiative Program," designedto stimulate more diFect business involvementin training, retraining, and employment of theeconomically disadVantaged. While the targetaudiences for programs designed and operatedunder JTPA are economically disadvantagedyouth and adults who lack marketable jobskills, title III of the act authorizes the ex-penditure of funds for retraining and relatedServices for displaced workers. JTPA is admin-iStered at the State level, and programs areimplemented through a network of local pri-vate industry councils that assess local needsand establish performance standards, fortrahi="ing and retraining programs_funded-trzider theprogram. Unlike CETA, JTPA-dOes not stipu-late that living Edlowances<will be provided to

trainees under certain circumstances. Suchprovisions are left to the discretion of Statelegislatures.

Recent Legislative ProposalsEducation, training, and retraining has been

high on the list of priorities for both the 97thand 98th Congresses. This is due in part toconcern over current and potential future workforce effects of shifts in the industrial composi-tion of the economy, and in part to the emerg-ence of "excellence in education" as an issueof national concern. In addition, the rising na-tional debt and reduced State and local reve-nues have generated considerable bipartisansupport for reexamining she Federal role ineducation; training, and retraining. Recentlegislative proposals with a bearing on instruc-tion for programmable automation include thefollowing:

strengthening precollege science andmath education by increasing the supplyof qualified instructors and encouragingcurriculum development;encouraging computer literacy throughteacher education; the creation of incen-tives for placement of computer hard-ware and software in local school systems,curriculum development, research; andother means;stimulating improvement in adultliteracy;providing assistance to the States to en-sure that target populations such as theeconomically disadvantaged, the handi-capped, men and Women entering nontra-ditional occupations, veterans, and adultsrequiring training and retraining are ade-quately served by vocational educationprograms;creating tuition tax credits; and individ-uaLeducatiiin and training accounts tostimulate greater individual participationin instruction; andcreating tax incentives to encourage em-ployers to provide additional training andretraining to employees as needed.

40 /

Ch. 10Policy Issues and Options 393

Optic-ins for Education, Training,and Retraining Policy

There is considerable pressure on the U.S.instructional system to be more responsive tostructural economic change. Economic andtechnological change may well result in morefrequent shifts in work force skill require-ments, and it may well require greater flexibil=ity and mobility among work force partici=pants than ever before. The ramifications ofPA for education and training are a subset ofthis larger :ssue; There may be a new mandatefor the U.S. instructional system as a wholeto gear education, training, and retraining pro-grams of all types more to long-range, struc-tural changes in the labor market. This focus,a change from the past orientation to relative-ly static occupational demands, will also re-quire a heightened awareness of skills that arecommon to a variety of occupationsskillsthat; by their very nature, may provide indi-viduals with greater occupational ini.joility.New approaches to curriculum design, morefrequent review and modification of existingcurricula in keeping with substantive labormarket change, an inciease in the supply ofqualified instructors in some disciplines, andmore attention to maintaining instructional fa-eilitiea and using state-of-the-art equipment,will be necessary.

While industry, labor unions, and educatorsare all providers of PA-related training andother types of instruction, they have limitedresources and sometimes hold different viewsof the nature and scope of instruction required;as Well as the most appropriate modes of de-livery. In light of these conditions, and theroles being assumed by industry and labor; theFederal role in education, training; and retrain=ing needs to be reexamined; The followingFed-eral policy options are proposed for consider-ation by Congress.

No Increased Federal RoleCongreas could choose not to modify Federal

involvement in education, training, and re-training in light of instructional needs asso-ciated with programmable automation. If this

option were pursued, PA-related instructionalrequirements would compete with all othersfor Federal dollars earmarked for elementary,secondary, vocational, and higher education,and for training and retraining. Producers andvendors of PA equipment and systems wouldprovide, as they do now, the bulk of initialtraining to employees of user firms.* Compa-nies utilizing PA would or would not provideadditional in-house instruction based on avail-able corporate resources and priorities.**Community colleges and trade and technicalschools, based on their varying readings ofavailable labor market forecasts, student de-mend, familiarity with local labor marketneed§, and resources, would choose whetheror not to develop PA-related degree and non-degree programs. Colleges and universitieswould, with existing resources, choose whetheror not to adapt their engineering, computerscience, business administration, and careerguidance programs to the needs of automatedmanufacturing environments, based on theirunderstanding of industry andior student de=mend. in elementary and secondary education,creating an awareness of career opportunitiesin automated manufacturing and providing in-formation on skIlla requirements would be leftto the discretion if the schooldistrict, institu-tion, or individual instructor.

The advantage of maintaining the existingFederal role in PA instruction is that program-mable automation is still in the earliest stagesof utilization. Little is known about how PAwill change or modify skill requirements, af-

*In the summer of 1982, OTA commissioned a survey ofviews of education, training, and retraining requirementsassociated with the use of programmable automation. ResultsOf telephone interviews with producers of PA equipment andsystems indicated that 93 percent of producer firms provideinstruction for their customers, but -that the training is narrowlyfccused and designed for use with a variety of occupationalgroups.

**The OTAcommissioned survey of views of PA-relatededucation, training, and retraining requirements found that 40percent of the representative manufacturing facilities_contactedutilized some form of PA, and of this number, only 22 percentsponsored or conducted education and training for automatedmanufacturing. Among the plants currently not offering instruc-tion of this type, only 18 percent Indicated any plans to imple-me,nt programs in the future. The most common reason citedwas "low benefits relative to costs."

4 08

394 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

feet job design, or trigger job loss, particularlyover the long term. Current lab-or market fore-casts shed little light on possible new careeropportunities within automated manufactur-ing on which to base instructional priorities.

The disadvantage of not modifying Federalinvolvement in education, training and retrain-ing for PA is that the Federal Governmentwould forego potential roles unlikely to beassumed by other levels ofgovertunent or theprivate sector, such as assisting in the coor=dinatim of instructional activities, ensuringthat adequate labor market forecasts are de-veloped and that information derived fromsuch forecasts is actively disseminated to in=dividuals, educators, and trainers. For exam-ple, State gove:iunents are unlikely to encour-age instruction that increases individualmobility within the work force (and betweenStates), although increased mobility may fur-ther national employment objectives. In ad-dition, shortages of instructors, inadequate fa-cilities and outdated equipment amongtraditional deliverers of technical instructionare national concerns. These conditions shouldbe cor idered hi determiningpossible Federalrolesin instruction for programmable automa-tion and in examining overall Federal involve-ment in education, training, and retraining.

Increase Support for Facilities, Equipmentand Qualified Instructors

Congress could cnoose to build on the exist-ing Federal role in elementary, secondary, andpostsecondary education by targeting re-sources for the purchase or lease of state-of-the-art equipment andior by making selectedfacilities ready for use in future periods of in-tense instructional demand. It could furtherincrease instructional_ capacity by creating taxincentives that would encourage user firms topurchase state-of-the-art equipment and sys-tems for training purposes and to expand theirin-house instructional facilities. Congress iscurrently considering proposals to strengthenscience and math instruction on the elemen-tary, secondary, and postsecondary levels byimproving curricula and stimulating more in-

terest in teaching careers in these fields. Itcould also consider methods to encourage in-terest in careers in engineering education andother forms of technical instruction.

The advantage of these congressional ac-tions is that upgrading facilities and equip-ment, as well as stimulating the supply of in-structors, would remove the major barriers tothe establishment of relevant instructionalprograms within the public and private sec=tors. Such actions would serve to shorten thetime from the identification of new skill re-quirements to the development of instruction-al programs. Removing impediments to thetimely design of instruction would be particu-larly valuable for displaced workers and othersseeking to develop new skills or enhance ex-isting skills quickly.

The disadvantage of congressional actionsof this type is that they might stimulate toomuch interest in PA-related instruction at theexpense of other types of education and train-ing. Doing so would result in the establish-ment of excess capacity for PA-related skillsdevelopment. In addition, there is the dangerthat facia* improvemente and equipmentpurchaaea could overahadoW attention givento need§ assessment, curriculum design, andinstructional program delivery.

Encourage Curriculum DevelopmentCongress could choose to encourage the de-

velopment of curricula for various educationallevels and instructional programs geared tothe development of PA-related skills, perhapsby fostering the develppment of voluntaryguidelines for PA-related curriculum content.This could be accomplished by establishing aprogram within tize Department of Educationthat would provide grants to educationalinstitutions to develop model curricula Alter-natively, funds for relevant curriculum devel-opment could be designated within the exist-ing program of Educational Block Grants toStates. By encouraging industry and laborparticipation in curriculum development at alllevelS, and by encouraging intersector coopera-tion in defining instructional requirements and

409

Ch. 10Policy Issues and Options 395

strategies generally, Congress could reinforceties between industry, labor, and the instruc-tional community.

Such congressional actions would create anenvironment for a new and coherent approachto curriculum design. At present, many pro-grams for PA-related skills development consistsimply of adding PA components to existingcurricula. For example, a number of roboticsmaintenance and repair programs are basedon long-established curricula for electrome-chanical technology or electronics. This ap-proach to curriculum design is not necessarilyineffective; it simply needs to be examined andevaluated. However, curricula that are tied tooclosely to specific occupations may not standthe test of time, particularly since presentskills requirements associated with PA mayrepresent only the first wave of change. En-couraging comprehensive curriculum designand the establishment of voluntary guidelinesfor curriculum content would guarantee somedegree of standardization to both enrollees andemployers. Such standardization would fosterthe development of common skills that would,in turn, encourage more standardized ap-proaches to job content and greater individualmobility within the work force. This would en-courage proactive education and training.

The disadvantageof such congressional ac-tions is that, unless carefully devised, theymight stifle creative approaches to curriculumdesign and content that are ongoing or thatmight otherwise develop on the institutionallevel. There is also a risk that the importanceof PA issues might be overemphasized in over-all curriculuM design.

Encourage Renewed Emphasis on Basic Skillsand Problem-Solving Ski RS

Congress could choose to encourage at alllevels of instruction a renewed emphasis onstrong, basic skills in reading, math; and-science. Special emphasis could be placed onthe development of individual problem-solvingskills, since these are important prerequisites

to training for careers in automated manufac-turing, as well for nonmanufacturing occupa-tions. Many individuals are unable to partici-pate in PA-related instruction due to basicskill deficiencies. Others have received tech-nical instruction that was geared to the devel-opment of manual skills and that providedlimited opportunities for the development ofmore abatract problem-solving abilities. Somehave held jobs for long periods that did notrequire use of conceptual skills that may bemore important for work in computerized set-tings. Congress could emphasize the impor-tance of both basic skills and problem-solvingSkills at all levels of instruction, and take stepsto coordinate basic-education programs forschool-age youth and adults. This could beaccomplished by strengthening the coordina-tion function now performed by the Depart-ment of Education for elementary, secondary,vocational, technical, and higher education.Cun cagy, the Department sponsors researchon alternative approaches to basic skills andproblem-solving skills development for dif-ferent levels of education and for students ofdifferent age groups.

There are a number of advantages in pursu-ing this option. First, it can make the laborsupply more resilient in the long-term by rais-ing the overall skill level. Second, it createsa common foundation of skills that could beenhanced over time (as needed) through the de-velopment of jolrelated skills, including thoseassociated with PA. Third, this approach doesnot feed the process of "skills obablescence"by tying individual instruction too closely tospecific technologiea.

The disadvantage of this course of action isthat it risks overemphasis of the basic skillsto the neglect of broader educational experi-ences and the stimulation of career interests.In addition, it represents only part of a long-term Solution, and it does not address the nerdfor the development of specific, PA-relatedSicilia needed in the short-term, such as main-tenance, repair, and programing.

41

396 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment; Education, and the Workplace-V_ - ----_- --

Intensify Efforts to Gather and BroadlyDisseminate Labor-Market Information

In order to adequately prepare for participa-tion in the work force ,individuals need accessto current, reliable information on labor mar-ket trends, especially trends for occupationalemployment. Educational and career guidance

- personnel at all instructional levels, as well asihdiVidualS who provide job counseling andPlacement assistance to adults, also need ac-cess to current, reliable information. Congresscould choose to strengthen the nationaldatabase for labor-market information and en-courage the development of strong links toState and local databases; where they exist.It could also encourage more systematic dis-semination of labor market information, incooperation with the private sector; by modi-fying.the responsibilities of the Bureau of La-bor Statistics and designating broad-bas6:1 iii=formation dissemination as a primary BLSfunction. These actions would require an in=crease in appropriations; in light of recent cut-backs in Federal statistical programs.

One advantage of this type of congressionalaction is that it would enhance public and pri-vate sector knowledge of labor market condi-tions, facilitating "informed" planning by in-dividuals', employers, educators, and all levelsof govertunent. Another advantage is that thedatabase could be used in combination withinformation on industrial activity (e.g., plantand facility improvements) as an early warn-ing system for major shifts in skills require-ments in older or emerging growth industries.

The disadvantage of enhancing currentlabor-market information gathering andslis-sernination programs is that additional Fed-eral expenditures would be required in a periodof relatively limited Federal resources. Thesuccess of such a program would hinge on theclose cooperation of industry and labor unifflnswith the Federal Government in sharing infor-mation on emerging skills requirements andcurrent approaches to job design.

Encourage Individual Participation inPA-Relathd InStruction

Congress could choose to influence the num-bers of indiriduals who seek PA-related in-struction or retraining for jobs in nomnanufac-turing sectors. Measures such as those alreadybeing considered by Congress to make individ-ual participation in instruction more econom-ically feasible could be used to encourage PA-related skills development Theae progosals in-clude: the creation of individual tax incentives;the designation of training as an allowable ex-pense under the Unemployment InsuranceSystem; and the eStablislune.nt of individualeducation or training accounts.

This course of action would increase the roleof individuals in the adjustment process. In-centives to individuals, would be particularlyvaluable in instances where employers do notprovide PA-related skills development oppor-tunities to their employees beyond the levelof introductory training. Displaced workerswho wish to pursue careers in computerizedenvironments or elsewhere would gain the re-sources for acquiring necessary skills.

Possible disadvantages in congressional ini-tiatives of this kind include overstimulationof individual interest in PA-related skills de=velopment that, unless carefully monitored,could result in a skills glut; proliferation of PAinstructional programs that are not necessari-ly of high quality; and a disincentive to indus-tries utilizing PA to provide employee instruc-tion.

Encourage Industry-Based InstructionFindings of an OTA-sponsored survey of

views of instructional- for pro-grammable automation suggest that the ma-jority of firms currently utiiizing computer-automated equipment and systems have noplans at this time to establish in-house instruc-tional programs in the near future.2°_These

"For additional information on this OTA-sponsored survey,n-ee AnComEitiori and the Workplace:Selected Labor; Education,and Training Issues, op. cit., March 1983.

Ch. 10Policy issues and Options

findings are in keeping with ongoing; privatesector concern about the high costs associatedwith providingiii-liOtile, tatliiiical instruction.Congress could Ch 6:Jae to encourage users ofprogrammable automation _to establish or en-hance fthristirig, iii=h-Ou§e technical training andeducation programs thiough the creation oftax incentives that help defray the costs of in-structora, equipment, expansion of instruc-tional facilitiea, and curriculum development:

This type of congressional action wouldstimulate additional training to meet short-term industrial needs. It_Woilld also encouragefirms already providing PA=relat6d instructionto broaden what is commonly Very narrowcourse content; to provide access to trainingto a wide range of occupational groupsin-cluding production line workers; and to consid-er establishing longer range human resourcedevelopment programs. Training associatedwith proprietary processes might be stimu-lated by the availability of additional resources.IncentiVea might be particularly useful inmaking training in small firms, more struc-tured and f6cUted; it traditionally occurs in-formally on the job due to limited resourcesand other factors.

One risk of such CongreSSional initiatives isthat they may not assist manufacturing work-ers who need it the moat: lower skilled produc-tion line *biker§ and skilled craftsmen whohave become unemployed or are at the great-est risk of job_ lOSS, since industry has tradi-tionally provided little training to_these work-er groups. The design of specific initiativeswould determine whether the unique needs ofthe§6 worker groups are taken into account ininstructional programs. There might also bea disincentive for some individuals to pursuePA=related education and training programsthat are not offered by their employers.

Intensify Research EffortsSince programmable technologies are still

maturing and PA diffusion is still in the earli-est phases, it is likely that additional changesin skill requirements for automated manufac-

turfing will emerge over time; Congress cmchoose to increase Federal sponsorship ofsearch to identir changing skills requiremeiwithin existing manufacturing occUpaticand emerging occupations, and to provide :broad-based dissemination of the findingsbetter equip educators and trainers for criculum deVelopment. Congress could also I.a research program to encourage the devellment of instructional standards that arekeeping with PA related skill requirements,could authorize the Departmenta of Educatiand Labor to establish mechanisms for /*Ilei review and reassessment of these staffarcs by industry, lab-or, and educators. Strengening the labor-market information databaas propos6d in a previous option, is a preyuisite for this initiative.

Individuals, educators, industry, and lalwould all benefit from an increased andstanding of changing skills and emergingcupations, especially since little researchthis kind is conducted within the privatestor. Broad -based dissemination of this infmation by F6deral and State governmennonprofit associations, and other entitwould ensure that workers of all types woihave access and the opportunity to determwhat it means in light of their career goals askill levels. Over time, the availability of tinformation would give individuals and intutions a stronger basis from which to forecfuture skills changes and to initiate instrtional activities based on these changes.creation of instructional standards wouldcourage the development of high-quality etcation, training, and retraining programs wcontent that accurately reflects industiskills requirements.

A disadvantage to this option is thatwould require an expanded Federal role incioteclmical research in a peril d of limited Feral resources. Another disadvantage is tlthe creation of instructional standards coistifle creative approaches to curriculum ctent at the institutional level; and instructioresponses to the needs of particular industrwith unique PA applications.

Appendix

Appendix

Selected Case Studies: Summaries

The following section includes summaries of fivecase studies of instructional programs designed todevelop skills that are presently associated withthe use of programmable automation (PA). Thesefive are part of a group of 14 such studies devel-oped for OTA. Instructional activities describedin the case studies summarized here include: 1) arobotics and computer-aided drafting program forhigh school students; operated by the OaklandCounty School System in southeastern Michigan:2) the undergraduate and graduate degree pro-grams in Engineering Technology offered by Brig-ham Young University; Provo, Utah; 3) CADAMInc.'s* customer training in computer-aided de,Sign; 4) the International Brotherhood of Electri-cal Workers' programmable controller training sys-tem; and 5) the "CADLCAM" operator trainingprogram based in Glendale, Calif. (repreaentativeof effortS characterized by strong industry; educa-tion, and government cooporation); The five stud-ies were selected for inclusion to illustrate PA=related instruction of various types and levels ofsophistication, as well as to highlight programsoperating in different geographic areas.

Case Study Resetifth MethodologyCase study research began in July 1982 and

ended in June 1983. The initial objective of the re--search project was to identify and contact aselected sample of institutions; organizations, andagencies knovim to offer or have the potential tooffer programs designed to prepare individuals forjobs in comPuter-automated factory environ-ments. Approximately 300 individuals repre-=senting industry, educational institutions, govern-ment agencies, professional associations; trainingand/or education associations, technical societies,and community organizations were contacted inthe first .stage of the research. This was augmentedby a literature search. A sample of 100 trainingor education programs was identified, frbm which20 Were chosen to be the subjects of 14 casestudies.

The following selection criteria were developed:Geographical spread. =Program8 were chosen

. from all four quadrants of the country, witha concentration of four programs from the

.cArrAm Inc is a .1:1h.liaitfr:cr Of the lioekhet2d Corp.

heavily industrialized areas of southeaste.Michigan.InStructional deliverers. The case studies ielude programs operated by primary schoolhigh schools; community colleges, univer:ties. and 4-year colleges, a union/managemerOperated training center, and industries thproduce and use PA equipment.Type of programmable automation traiing.--=Programs chosen provide instructioncomputer -aided drafting and design systemrobots; programmable controllers, domput(ized numerically controlled machines, autmated vision systems for factory inspectioautomated materials - handling- systeits, spcialized semiconductOr fabrfcation eqtupmer.and CAD and CAM networking systems. ]addition, university programs addressing tisystems approach to computer-integrat(manufacturing education, plus in-plant prgrams stressing the systems approach fimanagers; are included; _

Occupational categories of trainees. Prgrains covered in the case study series adress the needs of current or potential personel in the following Occupational categoriemachine operators; electrical, mechanical, arother maintenance personnel; welders; elect]cal and electronics technicians; robotics tecnicians; mechanical designers and detailerprinted circuit designers; electrical drafteand designers; numerical control programergeneral-purpoSe Programer* integrated cicuit designers; piping designers and draftermanufacturing engineers; design engineersystems engineers; research and develoPmeipersonnel; Shop=floor supervisors; managerand executives.Size of Institution or orgamzation.Compnies in-chided range in size from firms emploMg under 170 individuals to multinational coporations employing hundreds of thousancof people. In terms of the size of the organiztion served by a single training division, tllargest is 42,000. The educational institutionrange in size from_ 2,500 to 34,000 studentFunding source.-=Both public and private rstitutions and organizations are covered: Mjor public- funding sources include FederaState, and Local government organization

41

402 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment; Education; and the Workplace

The union/management-sponsored trainingprogram is supported by regular contribu-tions from union members and by manage-ment subsidy.Industrial sector Programs covered ad-dressed the following industrial sectors: trans-portation equipment (including auto and com-mercial aircraft); electrical and electronicdevices and machinery; nonelettrical machin-ery; and programmable equipment producers.Attempts were also made to identify suc-

cessful programs in the metalworking in-dustry.

Additionally; some programs were chosen be-cause they demonstrated cooperation among ed-ucational institutions, industries, and (in one in-stance) State and local government participation.Two questionnairesone for companies and onefor educational institutionswere designed for useduring onsite interviews (lasting 2 to 5 days each)conducted for each case study.

Appendix A Selected Case Studies: Summaries 403

Case Study I.Oakland County Vocational Education Centers: Roboticsand Computer-Aided Drafting For High School Students

Background/SummaryThe Oakland County Intermediate School Dis-

trict coVers approximately 9D0 square Miles to thenorth and west of Detroit. The intermediate dis-trict is comprised of 28 constituent school districtsand includes most of Oakland County and smallproportions of the adjacent counties of Macomb,Wayne; Livingston; Genessee; Lapeer; and Wash-tenaw.* The approximately 211,000 children in thedistrict live in communities of widely disparateeconomic status: some are among the wealthiestin the country, while others have disproportionatenumbers of families on State and Federal aid.**In 1982, Pontiac, the largest constituent schooldistrict; had an unemployment rate of over 20percent.

In 1967, voters in the intermediate districtpassed a half-mill levy to pay the constructioncosts for four area vocational educatiorvcenters,

ione in each quarter of the county. The four cen-tersoperated under contract to Oakland Schoolsby the constituent districts of Pontiac; Royal Oak;Walled Lake, and Clarkstonoffer programs in 32occupational areas. Three 21/2 hour sessionsmorning; early afternoon; and late afternoonareoffered for high school students, who spend the re-mainder of their school day at the "home" highschools; and the centers all operate evening classesfor adults: The flexible vocational instruction offered at the centers complements the vocationaleducation provided at high schools that operateindividual vocational programs. The centers alsoprovide basic-through7advanced instruction forstudents from schools that have no vocational pro-grams of their own. Students who participate ina full 2-year course of study at a center get 900hours of combined classroom and laboratory in-struction in a specific vocational area.***

This is Oakland Schools; a brochure published by the Oakland In-termediate District, explains that "in Michigan; every local school dis-trict is a part of an intermediate district; there is no exempt territory.The intermediate school district is a regional educational service agency,Teated by State law to carry out certain legal functions at the direc-Ann of the State Department of Education.

This is-OakiandSchools.---The number of hours in vocational education curricula is mandated

by the State and is comparable to that offered in comprehensive highschools.

Oakland Schools also provides an additional aidto vocational programing in both the local districtsand the regional centers: curriculum specialists onthe vocational education staff at the OaklandCounty Service Center assist instructors in apply-ing current instructional technology, in keepingprogram content up to date, in obtaining fundsand equipment, and in maintaining contact withlocal industries.

In the summer of 1982, the Pontiac Center of-fered a special 4-week introductory robotics pro-gram for incoming juniors and seniors. The inten-sive 64-hour course was a demonstration programdesigned to test the feasibility of teaching roboticsand other "high tech" courses in the centers' reg-ular schooFyear and summer offerings. As a resultof the successful summer_program, robotics andcomputer-aided drafting are now taught in a num-berof regular courses in three of the area centers.

The centers have approached the teaching of in-tegrated manufacturing skill in a variety of ways:1) teachers at the Pontiac Center have designeda semester-long course in robotics offered for thefirst time in January 1983; 2) the Royal Oak Centerhas obtained two computer-aided drafting stationsfor use in mechanical and architectural draftingcourses, and instructors there are using homemaderobots to teach basic robotics principles in fluidpower and electronics courses; and 3) the WalledLake Center also has a CAD system for use in itsdrafting program, and instructors are now usingthe Mini-Mover " teachrobot"* from the Pontiacsummer course to teach electronics, welding, in-dustrial design and machine-shop students thefundamentals of robotics as these relate to thestudents' core disciplines.

Summer Robotics Program, North EastOakland Vocational Education Center(Pontiac; Mich;)

Planning and Development..The summer ro-botics demonstration program was conceived dur-ing an informal conversation between a vocational

Teach-robots are miniature, table-top electric robots useful forteaching programing and robot motions.

416

404 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education; and the Workplace

education curriculum specialist from OaklandSchools Service Center and the principal of thePontiac Vocational Education Center. Althoughthe amount of time from initial conception (March1982) to approval by the Oakland Schools' super-intendent's committee (June 2, 1982) to programimplementation (June 28) was Short, the preplan-ning which enabled Oakland instructors, curricu-lum specialists, and administrators to create theprogram on such short notice had been going onfor the past 10 yearS.

The preplanning began not with robotics itselfbut with an ad-hoc group of instructors and cur-riculum specialists meeting infOrmally to explorethe utilization of computer technology in theclass-room. Five years ago; the computer group beganpreparing for robotics and other industrial applica-tions of computer technology by makingandmaintaining_---inclustrial contacts; expanding theirworking knowledge of microcomputer's and pro-grammable controllers; and familiarizing them-selves with robotics. All this; according to the cur-riculum specialist who spearheaded the group, wasdone in anticipation of the time when roboticswould be recognized EIS suitable subject for highschool vocational education;

Because of the necessity of waiting for the prop-er moment when public interest in robotics wouldbe high enough to encourage the Oakland Schools'superintendents' committee to pass on such a pro-grain proposal, the preplanning was necessarily, in-formal. The yearS of informal planning; however,proved to be productive; when the board's approv-al was received in the beginning of June, the com-puter-group members were able to bring togethera team of teachers with expertise in electronics,physics, machining, and computer Programingwho both devised the curriculum and delivered theinstruction11e Service Center curriculum special-ist and the Pontiac Center principal bought someequipment and contacted industrial representa-tives who donated or loaned the remainder and=With the help of the instructorsarranged for fieldtrips to local user and producer firms and for guestlectures by application engineers, sociologists andothers.

Goals.=The program was designed to meet twosets of objectives: The immediate instructional_ob-jectives were to familiariie the students with thefundamental§ of robotics to help them make futurecareer and educational decisions, and to increasetheir awareness of and interest_ in high technologyin general. The long=range goals were: 1) to devel-op, implement, and make necessary modifications

to the curricular materials with the object of pro-viding them to secondary and postsecondary ed-ucational institutionsoffering robotics instruction;2) to develop a core of people within the public ed,ucational system with knowledge of robotics; and3) to demonstrate that a public educational orga-nization is capable of initiating robotics programsin a timely fashion.

Administrative and Instructional "Staff.Thesummer program staff consisted_ of two administrators, five teacher§,_ and three student program-ing aides. The chief administrator for the program;the principal of the Pontiac Center, was responsi-ble for student enrollment, obtaining the equip-ment, arranging for the students to receive aca-demic credit, and other administrative require-ments; the Oakland School§ Service Center cur-riculum specialist coordinated all curricular activ-ities. The team of five instructors develOped theinstructional materials and designed and deliveredthe coursework; and the student aides (two collegestudent§ and one high school senior) were on handto help with programing and writing software forthe Apple computers used to interface with thesmall teach robots used in the course; All of theinstructors had a minimum of 2,000 hourS of in-dustrial experience,' two were members of the Ed-ucation Committee Of Robotics International ofthe Society of ManufacturingEngineera, and somehad experience teaching and writing curricula forcolleges and other poa=g0cohdary institutions.

Facilities and Equipment Classes were held ina large classroom-laboratory in the Pontiac Center..Equipment used in the program included fourdesk-top teach robots (two of which were pur-chased, two of Which were borrowed from distrib-utors), six Apple computers, three eathOde ray ter-minals (CRTs), two DEC writers (strike-on termi-nals) and electrical and electronic test equipment.

Student Selection. Because apProval for theprogram was received at the end of the regularschool_ year (June 2), Student selection procedureswere highly informal. The program administrator'sdiscussed the program withthe guidance counse-lors in all of_the high sehool§ served by the Pon-tiac Center. By the time the board's approval wasannounced, however, most of the high_schdols had

_started their final examination Periods or had re-leased their students for the summer. Schools intwo large -diatritta, Pontiac and Rochester, re-sponded by announcing the program over theirpublic address systems, requesting that all inter-ested sophornore§ and juniors apply: Fifteen of thesixteen applicants were selected, and all but one

Appendix ASelected Case Studies: Summaries 405

completed the 4-week course. Interviewers lookedfor college-bound students with strong math andphysics backgrounds and with some experienceinelectronics and/or computers. Approximately 75percent of the applicants had the recommendedbackground knowledge; the remainder of those ad-mitted were chosen because of their high level ofinterest in the program. Of the 14 students whocompleted the program, one was female and onewas from a minority group.

Curriculum.Classroom and laboratory instruc-tion was complemented by field trips to PontiacMotors; ASEA's midwest robot facility, and a lo-cal robotics show. Students also heard guest lec-tures by industrial representatives from PontiacMotor Division, ASEA, ETON Corp:, and the Kas-per Machine Co., and by two sociologists whotalked about the social implications of robotics.The following topic areas were covered in lecturesand reinforced by field trips; demonstrations, andlaboratory experiments:

History and classificationFactors influenc-ing the growth of robotics in industry; manu-facturing processes in which robots. are util-ized; definition and description of robots andtheir component parts; robot classifications(nonservo, point-to-point servo- controlled;and continuous-path servo-controlled); de-scription of commercially available robots;and the potential areas of growth in robotics.

O Simple machine process and robot terminolo-gyDescription of simple machine functionsand the relationship between robot design-and-function terminology and the basic termi-nology of machine design.Basics of electricity and motor operation/controlAn introduction to selected funda-mentals of electricity and electronics, specifi-cally DC power distribution and simple DCcircuits. Students learned to use basic instru-ments to monitor electrical power and to lo-cate malfunctioning segments.

e Micro-computer operation and programingLectures and demonstrations of computeroperation and practical experience in comput-er programing.Robotic drive systemsA segnient in whichstudents learned how to address the teach ro-bots with standard computer programs andprepared specific programs for robot opera-tion:Robot applications - Review of manufactur-ing operations related to robot applicationsand field trips to design and manufacturingfacilities.

Opportunities in roboticsExamination ofthe employment opportunities in the field ofrobotics; requirements of various job classi-fications as they relate_ to the individual's de-velopment of skills and academic knowledge.

Had the superintendent's committee approvalbeen received earlier, the instructors would haveattempted to add another 2-week segment cover-ing pneumatics and hydraulics, Lack of time anddifficulty in obtaining equipment, however, madethis impossible.

Instructional Methods and Materials.Thechoice of a team-teaching approach was dictatedby the interdisciplinary nature of robotics itselfand also by necessityno one teacher in the Oak-land system had all of the background knowledgeand skills required to teach_the full 4-week pro,.gram. However, the team of instructors workedwell together; and each individual member of theteam enhanced his own knowledge of related fieldswhile imparting his particular expertise to the stu -.dents. The lead instructorwho was on hand atall times to teach specific class segments; guidethe students through experiments; and to providecontinuity as the course moved from segment tosegmentwas an electricity instructor employedfull-time at the Pontiac Center. Industrial repre-sentatives taught the basics of robotics; a physicsinstructor taught the unit on simple machine pros-esses and aided the students as they conductedphysics experiments; an electronics instructorfrom the Walled Lake Center taught the segmentson electricity and electronics; and a programinginstructor from another intermediary districttaught the basics of programing.

The first 2 days of the program consisted of in-troductory lectures; films; demonstrations; and afield trip to Pontiac Motors, where the studentssaw industrial robots in operation and visited therobotics training laboratory. From the third daythrough the end of the course, the majority ofclasstime was spent in practical laboratory work,progressing from experiments in basic physics-andelectricity through robot programing, Because ofthe limited time available for each segment and thestudents' impatience with lengthy explanations ofa theoretical nature, the instructors had to con-dense all of the material and be highly selectivein the presentation of some of the topics. The ne-cessity to condense and select_was most challeng-ing in the 3-day electricity/electronics segmentwhich, after an introductory lecture in basic elec-tricity and the importance of electronics to thestudy of robotics; concentrated on DC power dis-tribution and simple DC circuits.

41$

406 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

As in the -other segments of the course, the ob=ject in the electricity segment was to familiarizethe students with some of the basic concepts andmost importantly7to whet their interest and en-courage them to pursue studies providing themwith more complete knowledge of the disciplinesmaking up robotics.

The instructors also worked as a team to cleverlythecurriculum and written materials for thecourse. Since no texts, manuals, or experimentsappropriate to secondary-level teaching were avail:able, the instructorsaided by the curriculum ape-cialist and by experts from industrydevelopedlaboratory manuals, experiments; a robotics glos-gory, and handouts defining and describing robotfunctions; components, and classifications. In ad-dition, the instructors developed computer soft-Ware for use by the students in programing expert=

ments.Student Evaluations of the Program. In writ-

ten evaluations, most students noted that theyhad enjoyed the class: The majority were im-pressed by the team-teaching approach and the op-portunities for individualized instruction: A num-ber stated that they intended to pursue roboticestudies and some claimed that the course helpedthem to decide on a future career in robotics. Someatudent§ noted the lack of training in hydraulicsand suggested that it should be included were thecourse to be repeated. The other criticism receivedwas from two students who felt that the electrici-ty segment was too theoretical.

The instructors are now considering methods ofdealing with the electronics segment in future fa-miliarization courses. Suggestions include: 1) plac-ing the segment later in the course when studentswould be better able to understand its relevance;2) making provisions for a supplemental class forthose with no background in basic electricity; and3) teaching electronics as it applies to robotics;rather than beginning with pure electricity/elec-Ironies:

All of those who completed the course receiveda half unit of credit, which was entered on theirhigh school transcripts (one credit equals a fullsemester-long course).

RelatiOnShipS With Industry.In the spring of1982, program adniinistrators and members of theinstructional team met with General Motors (GM)representatives from the Orion Plant (a new facili-ty with over 160 robots, which; at the time, wasunder construction) and from Pontiac Motor Divi-sion tudeterthine the feasibility and appropriate-neaa of Offering robotics on the secondary level.

The GM-representatives and other industrial con=tacts agreed that introductory courses in rcilioticson the secondary level would not only benefit thestudents by providing them with an orientationto the field, but benefit industry by raising publicawareness and student interest.

These industrial contacts, made in the prepro-posal stage of the program, also proved to be fruit-ful in the curriculum planning and program opera-tion stages. The Pontiac Motors representativenot only' worked with the instructors to dw evelopthe curriculum, but delivered the intrUchietery lec-ture to the first class and arranged for a field tripto the Pontiac plant. Other industrial representa-tives from firms that produce, distribute, and useautomated. machinery donated time and equip-ment to the program. While no formal industrialadvisory- committee was establiahed before thesummer- was offered, the curriculum spe-cialist_ Who helped administer the program (who isalso the vocationaliteclmical coordinator for theOakland district) has set up an informal commit -tee to provide advice on present and future pro-grama and coursework.

Relationships With Labor Unions.-=Local labi.unions were not involved in the summer program,

Primarily because school officials looked on thesummer course as a test case which would helpthem to develop prototype curricular materialswhich, they felt, were needed before asking forUnion advice or participation; Before the downturnin the area economy, local labor and company of-ficials actively recruited students from the voca-tional_ education centers in the district, so/thatschool representatives believe that union partici-pation in an advisory capacity would be appropri-ate fer computer-aided manufacturingcoursework.Vocational education representatives/ are nowmaking informal contacts with union alicipworkersand hope to increase the level of contact with localunions in the near future.

Results: Apart from achieving its objective- ofproviding the participating_ atudentsiv,rith an orien7tation to robotics, the summer program had anumber of Other salutary resultsii As one of thecountry's first robotics prOgthrne on the secondarylevel, it generated_a great deal of public interestand received coverage in local newspapers, on lotaltelevision stations, and in publicationa like theManPower and Vocational Education Weekly andpublications of the American Vocational Asaocia=tion. This positive publicity not only helped to con -

ofaChbol board officials the viability of highschool programs in robotics and other high:tech=

Appendix ASelected Case Studies: Summaries 407

nology areas; but generated the beginnings_ of acommunications network between Oakl andSchools and other high Schools both in- and out-of-State. The vocational education curriculum Spe-cialist who coordinated the program has receivedover 60 letters and calls from high schools, col-leges, universities, and industries from across thecountry, all of which are either interested in estab-lishing programs or haVealready done so; The localpublicity also increased student interest in otherprograms offered by the centers. The Pontiac Ceti=ter, for example, attributes an increase in enroll-ment for its electricity course to interest engen-dered by the robotics program. Enrollment in:creased from 35 in fall 1981 to 50 (capacity enroll-ment for two sections) in fall 1982.

Another result of the program, can be seen in thecurrent offerings of three of the Oakland voca.tional education centers (discussed in sec; II) andin a number of lecal high schools in the constitu-ent districts served by the centers. The equipmentpurchased for the summer program is now in usein two of the centers. Most of the instructors whoparticipated in the program brought roboticS intotheir regular school-year classes (either as a seg-ment in existing courses or as a free-standing, sem-

25-459.0 - 84 - Qli 3

ester -long course) in the centers or in local highschools; and other instructors in the centers arenow offering or planning to offer coursework in ro-botieS or computer-aided design. The summer pro-gram also helped Oakland School officials to setup an articulation process with local privateschools, community colleges; universities, andthree inchiStrial robotics programs.

The diStrict is setting up a formal articulationagreement with nearby Oakland Community Col-lege whereby students who take robotics course-work in the Oakland SChoolS will receive advancedstanding in the college's robotics program. The ar-ticulation process with the other schools and pro-grams is, to date, informal. Other tangible resultsinclude the curricular and instructional materialdeveloped by the summer instructorsmanuals,instructional units (both lectures and experi-ments), computer _software &Signed for studentuse; the robotics glossary, and a study analyzingthe reading level required for currently availablerobotics texts. These materials, and the experiencegained in developing them, are now being put touse in classroom and laboratories throughout thediStrict and will be refined and expanded in the im-mediate future.

42u

408 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education; and the Workplace

Case Study 2Brigham Young University: The Education

of Technologists

Summary/BackgroundThe College of Engineering and Technology.

Brigham Young University (BYU)with a maincampuS in Provo, Utah; and a campus in Hawaii=is the largest private_university in the UnitedStatei: Founded in 1875 as the Brigham YoungAcademy, an elementary school with 29 students,BYU currently has an enrollment of approximate-ly 28,000 at its Provo campus-and over 1,80.0 inHawaii. While its primary intent is to provideundergraduate education; BYU does maintain:anumber of graduate programs on the master's anddoctoral levels_which have a combined graduateenrollment of 2,890.

'Brigham Young University's College of Engi-neeririgTuld-Tedinology has a total enrollment ofapproximately 3,400 students working on under;graduate and graduate degrees in six departments:chemical engineering, civil engineerimg, electricalengineering mechanical engineering; industrial eci=ucation, and technology; The four engineering de-partments offer traditionally structured under-graduate engineering programs and masters- andPh. D.=level graduate degrees; The technology de-nartment offers three prbgrams leading to the bac-calaureate degree (manufacturing engineeringtechnologY, design engineering technology, andelectronics engineering technology), and a master'sprogram in computer-integrated manufactuEingwith program options in cOmputer-aided manufac=Wring (CAM) and computer-aided deSign (CAD),and elective courses in computeraided testing(CAT); In the fall semester of 1983, the tecimologydepartment began to_ offer a graduate programleading to the degree of master of technologymanagement; _

Engineering Technology.In 1967, BYU became the first educational institution in the cOuh-try to receive accreditation from the EngineersCouncil for Professional Development (now known

as the Accreditation Board for Engineering andTeChnology; or ABET) for its baccalaureate programs immanufaCturing engineering technologyand_- design engineering technology. In 1971,BYU'S ;B.S._ program in electrOniCS engineeringtechnology was also accredited by ABET:

422

While engineering technology is closely relatedto engineering=and while the education of engi-neers and technologists overlaps in many areasthere are significant differences between the two.disciplines. BYU'S College of Engineering andTechnology offers the following definitions Whichclarify the distinctions:

Engineering is' the profession in which aknowledge of the inatheMatical and naturalSciences gained by study, experience, andpractice is applied with judgment to developways to utilize economically the materials andforces of nature for the benefit of mankind.Technology is that part of the technologicalfield which requires the application of scien-tific and engineering knowledgeand methodscombined with technical skills inisupport ofengineering activities; it occupies a positionon the occupational spectrum between thecraftsman and the engineer at the end of thespectrum closest to the engineer.'

Technologista, in essence, are applied engineers.This may at first seem to be a misnomer, 4fice en-gineering is traditionally considered to be an ap-plied discipline. However, a brief overview of de-velopmenta in engineering education in the UnitedStates over the past .25 years clarifieS the-issue.When the, U.S. space program began in the lite1950's and early 1960's, engineering,schools beganresponding to the increased need for science-oriented courses by adding advanced courses inmathematics, physics, and chemistry to their cur-ricula. In the process, traditional engineering lab-oratory courses in drafting, machining, and proc-essing were dropped out of the curricula to makeroom for the more theoretical courses required tomeet the needs of sophisticated space-age technol-ogy. As technical knowledge and applications mul-tiplied, the gap Spread between engineers, whoseeducation was becomingincreasingly theoretical,and technicians engaged in manufacturing and de-sign occupationa. Baccalaureate technology pro-grams (Some began as 2-year techniCian programs,while others were originally designed as 4-year pro-

'Brochure; College of Engineering Seiences and TochnolOgy, p. 9.

Appendix ASelected Case Studies: Summaries 409

grams) were created to bridge the occupational gapbetween the engineer and the technician.

According to BYU representatives, it is no long,.er possible for one person to master the skills andknowledge required to cover the spectrum fromconceptualization to the manufacture of a finalproduct. Now, the idea for a product often origi-nates with marketing, 'engineering, or manage-ment; the engineers and technologists work as ateam to develop the layout and detailed design andto test the prototype product. The technologistand engineer work together to plan, design, andtest the machines or procedures for building a sys-tem or its components, and then the craftsmen andmachine operators bring about the actual produc-tion.* In terms of theoretical orientation; the pro-gression goes from abstract at the design researchengineer's end, to highly practical at the tech-nician's and craftsman's end. While the engineer,then; may be interested in why a system; product;or procedure performs so that he/she can createplans or designs, the technologist is concernedwith how that system; product; or procedure per-forms so that the engineering plans can be appliedin practice and are implemented in the most pro-ductive manner.

Engineering Technology Programs at BYU:BYU's Technology Department has gained nation-al prominence; especially among industrial employ-ers; many of whom say that the technology grad-uates have precisely those skills most in demandby firms implementing computer-aided manufac-turing, design; and applied electronics procedures.Created with industrial needs in mind, the tech-nology programs at BYU were quick to incorpo-rate computer-aided techniques and machinery. Inthe early 1970's, individual faculty members in themanufacturing and design programs began explor-ing ways of acquiring computer-aided equipmentto enable them to integrate CAD and CAM intothe undergraduate curricula, and they initiated anumber of research projects. In addition, datacommunications and real-time computer controlwere developed.

One research project used group technologyclassifications to create what has now evolved intoDCLASSa computer program that classifies; or-ganizes, and retrieves information to assist in proc-ess planning, material selection, circuit design,generation of time standards; and other industrial

*The Accreditation Board for Engineeringand Technology (ABET)also recognizes the necessity of engineers and technologists_ workingtogether as a team in industrial projects. According to ABET repre.sentatives, it is for this reason that over 700 associate and bachelorlevel technology programs have been accredited since the 1960's.

applications. DCLASS is now licensed by 20 com-panies for use in 50 plants, and revenues receivedfrom the sale of DCLASS licenses help to supportcontinuing research into computer-aided manufac-turing by BYU faculty and students. In 1977; thetechnology department instituted a master of sci-ence degree program in computer-aided manufac-turing; the program has expanded over the yearsto encompass computer-aided design and comput-er-aided electronics testing and is now known asthe Computer Integrated Manufacturing Pro-gram. The masters program and the undergradu-ate programs in manufacturing engineering tech-nology and _design engineering technology are theprimary subjects of-this study.*

In recent years, BYU's traditional engineeringdepartments have been building their capacity inwhat they_ refer to as computer- assisted engineer-ing** and have joined with the teclmology depart-ment to foim the Computer Assisted Design, En-gineering; and Manufacturing (CADEM) Commit-tee to coordinate the use of computers within theCollege of Engineering and Technology and to in-crease communication and cooperation betweendepartments.

Engineering Technology: Educationand Research Activities

A common misperception by outside observ-ersincluding a number of BYU faculty andstudents outside the technology departmentisthat the department offers undergraduate pro-grams in computer-aided design and manufactur-ing. Actually, however; while computer-aidedmethodologies and techniques are incorporatedinto the curricula of the three technology programswhenever appropriate; the programs themselvesfocus on providing students with a strong foun-dation in the basics of the three disciplinesdesign, manufacturing, and electronicsaug-mented by computer techniques currently in usein industry. It is at the master's level that the tech!nology prograins focus solidly on computer-aidedmanufacturing and design.

The incorporation of computer-aided techniquesand coursework into the undergraduate curricula

*The electronics technology program currently lags behind the othertwo technology programs in incorporating computeraided techniques.This pardlels the relative lag of industry in computer-aided electronictesting. This program will therefore receive less attention in the pres-ent study.

**Computera.ssisted engineering (CAE) is defined by BYU engineer-ing_faculty as "the application of computers to the whOle range of cal-culation and simulation tasks, needed for modern professiong engineer.ing," including finite element analysis and routines for optimization,linkage synthesis graphics. and numerical utility.

422

410 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

varies from program to programreflecting 1) cur-rent industrial practices in the three disciplines;2) the varying amount of conventional manufac-turing and design skills required by the differentdiscipline& and 3) the availability of industrialequipment. Thus; the design curriculum is mostsuffused with computercaided techniques andplications both because of the large amount OfCAI) equipment in the department and becauseof the rapid spread of computer-aided design in in-dustrial setting&

The manufacturing program; while it is providedWith well-equipped labs, stresses conventionalmanufacturing techniques- for the first 3 years ofstudy to provide the foundation for the advancedcomputer-aided manufacturing technique§ and ap-plications taught in senior and graduate-levelclasses. The eleetrbnics program is the least in-volved in computer -aided applicationsa reflec;tion of the relatively late development of COMput-er-aided testing (CAT) technology and difficultyin obtaining CAT and process instrumentationequipment.

Undergraduate Programs: Common Features.Goats . -7-The particular_ goals and objectives of

individual programs are discussed in the programdescriptions. The technology department as awhole, however, has identified a number of goalswhich have a significant general impact on the cur=ricula and instruction in all of the programa. Somegeneral goals are to "edueate the 'whole person"'_by requiring students to_take a broad variety ofgeneral education courses and to instill in the 8tu-dentg a recognition of the necessity of "life-longlearning:" While life=lorig leaning is; in the mostbasic sense, the responsibility of the individual, thegraduate who stops learning rapidly becomes ob-solete when he_or she leaves school and enters atechnical field. For this reason, the technology fac-ulty places major emphasis on bolstering the 'Stu-dents' commitments to learn how to learn on theirown; to keep thethaelves apprised of new develop-ments in their professional fields; and to continual;ly update their skills and knowledge.

Faculty.Two distinguishing features mark themembers of the technology faculty; First; all havehad significant industrial experience in their in-structional fields; That experience ranges-from aminimum of 3 to 5 years in industry to a maximumof 10 or More years. Second; while industrial ex=perience is required of the faculty, doctoral degreesare not required. Of the 16 full-time facultymembers; 6 have doctoral degrees and the remain-der have masters' degrees in technology or engi-

neering. Although the department actively encour-ages its faeulty to engage in research and to pub-lish the results, that research is often of a practi-cal and applications-oriented nature.

Teaching Methods and Materials.All of thetechnology programs emphasize practical experi-mentation and application of the theoretical ma-terial taught in the classroom. The programs re-quire that approximately 50 percent of the_stu-dents' time be spent in laboratory work. Com-ment§ by both students and faculty, however, in-dicate that many students spend more than therequired amount of time in the laboratories, sothat the ratio of lab work to class work may actu-ally be higher than one-to-one. Another instruc-tional method in the department is the assignmentof actual industrial projects to undergraduate stu-dents. Instructors on the design faculty, for ex-ample; are frequently requeated to use the school'sCAD equipment to perform benchmark studies ofcompany drawings to help them determine the ef-ficiency of a CAD system for the company's par-ticular purposes. The studies themselves are as-signed fra projects to upper-division design stu-dents, who thereby gain actual industrial experi-ence.

Other advanced students participate in similar-ly practical research projects condueted or coor-dinated by department facility. Seeveral technologyfaculty members are now working on computer-aided learning techniques and .instructional sys-tertia, one of whichthe Computer Aided Simula-tion Training System (CAST)is being developedfor use in both industrial and educational manirfac-Wring program& When the CASTproject is com-pleted; the learning package Will contain a totalof 300 learning modules each providing instruc-tion on a specific manufacturing procesa. As thesemodules are developed, they are incorporated intothe manufacturing curricula at BYU;

One Problem facing the department is the un-availability of appropriate textbooks in the CAD;CAM, and applied electronics areas; Sincetextbooks On technology quickly become outdated,the departMent is continually looking for otherways of, supplying students with written materi-al. A "Group Technology _Collection" has beenestablished in the university library -to give stu-dents access to the groNmg number of reports andarticles on productivitk;maiibfacturingprocesses,and new deVelopments in hardware; software, coni=Puteriied data bases; and other topica. In addition,copies of monographs disbussing Current topics inmanufacturing and design are reproduced and dis-

Appendix ASelected Case Studies: Summaries 411

tributed to students for their personal collections.Another "library" resource, although not textual;is a growing "parts library" containing a collec-tion of manufactured parts, which are used in theclassroom to illustrate the end-products of themanufacturing processes being studied.

Enrollment Trends. E nrollment in technology:department programs has tripled in the last 3years; Currently; there are just under 1,000 stu-dents enrolled in the three undergraduate pre'grams: approximately 210 in manufacturing, 220in electronics, and over 550 in design. This posesa problem for the department and the universityin that even the new facility will only be capableof accommodating 900 students. Consequently, apolicy of "enrollment control" has been introducedon a university-wide basis. Since enrollinents- allOf the technology programs are increasing, and tmanufacturing and electronics programs' are epected to reach enrollments of up to 300 each wiin the next 5 years, the design program enrollmentwill be gradually reduced over the coming years.Of the approximately 1;000 students; fewer,than50 are women, and most of them are enrolled in

enrollment trends can be found in the p ogramthe design program.* More detailed discus ion of

descriptions.Cooperative Education.The Collegelbf Engi-

neering and Technology operates an" ac ve coop-erative education program which give studentsthe opportunity to integrate their aca emic stud-ies with periods of work experience. ome of thetraditional engineering departments end to dis-courage students from entering the, cooperative ed-ucation (co-op) program by structuring the curric-ulum into a lock-step sequence mil4h creates dif-ficulties for students who spend,tiine off-campus.

The technology department, onlihe other hand,actively encourages its students to take advantageof the co-op program. ApproxiMately 45 percentof the 128 students enrolled in:the college's co-opprogram in 1981-82 were technology students whoworked at such firms as Beeing; Genera1Dy-narnics, Ford Aerospace; Honeywell, Eaton-Ken-way, and Westinghouse. Aside from the obviousadvantage of obtaining practical experience tosupplement academic knowledge and laboratory

In recent years. BYU has been actively encouraging "equal oppor-tunity and rights for women students.',' According to the technologydepartment chairman. women who graduate from any of the depart-ment's progrtuns will have an excellent chance of being hired becauseof equal employment opportunity prOgrams. While the number ofwomen in the design program is growing, many women drop out of themanufacturingprogram. Technology department faculty say that thisis primarily because a number of women are uncomfortable withmanufacturing laboratory work.

skills, a large number of technology students havethe additional advantage of discovering 'throughexperience whether or not they want to accept thepermanent job offers they usually receive from theco-op employers;

Ironically, the success of the co-op program hascreated a problem for the department in that anumber of employers have tried to convince theirco-op students to stay on with the firm rather thanreturn to school to complete their degrees. Anotherproblem, which is somewhitTiniiting to some tech-nology students; is the geographical isolation ofthe Provo campus and the consequent necessityfor over half of the co-op students to relocate tem-porarily to accept out-of-state employment._

Furthermore; a large number of BYU under-graduates are married many with young fathilieS.These students, especially, find it difficult toaccept an out-of-state co-op assignment; For theseand other reasonsincluding competition fromother schools, the downward trend in the economy(which has caused a number of firms to discontinuetheir co-op programs), and increasing pressure onthe university to turn out graduatesthe co-opprogram has tapered off in recent years from apeak of 285 students in 1979-80 to 128 in 1980-82.Nevertheless, it still receives the support of the col-lege and the active participation of technologys tudents;

Counseling and Career Guidance.The univer-sity counseling center offers both group and in-dividual counseling for students with personal oracademic problems, and the engineering college ad-visement center provides specific advice on engi-neering and technology programs; The universityalso has a career education program that providesthe following services: 1) courses on life planningand decisionmaking, career exploration, and em-ployment strategies; 2) interest testing; and 3) aca-demic and occupational counseling.

In spite of all of these formal' counseling andguidance channels; some technology faculty mem-bers feel that a great deal of the students' time andmoney is wasted because they do not receive com-prehensive interest- and ability-testing when theyare admitted to the university. This lack is feltmost keenly in the technology department, wherea major portion of the undergraduates are transfer,/students from other colleges and departments; Allthough some of these students discover the tech=nology department through regular counselingchannels; the vast majority learn of the depart-ment and the content of its curricula almost byaccidentthrough friends, chance conversations,'or parties outside the University;

424

412 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education; and the Workplace

ManufaCturing Engineering Technology.Likeits sister program in design technology; the man-ufacturing technology program was organized in196G and accredited by what is now known asABET in 1967. The program was constructed inSuch a way that; over the years; it has been ableto accommodate the industrial trend toward com-puter-assisted processes and equipment withoutSignificantly altering its original focus; At thesame time; the program has been refined over theyears to minimize duplication, improve the coursesequence, establish meaningful prerequisites; andgive students flexibility in choosing areas ofconcentration.

Both the instructional program and the majorresearch projects of the faculty and students arecharacterized by a highly systematic approach.That approach relies on the following:

a Definition of the subject matter (in this casemanufacturing); its essential elements,- andthe activities involved;Identification of the need for a progrte inmanufacturing technology and_ the processesand approaches to be employed to meet thatneed; and

a Classification of the processes and compo-nents of manufacturing to forM the basis ofa systematic approach to teaching and re-search. The notion of classification as e-ployed by thornanuiacturing faculty rests onthe following description: "Classification notonly assists the memory by arranging individ-ual items into groups; but also expresses a re-lationship of things and leads to the discoveryof their laws. "' BYU'S approach is based onan attempt to discover the laws governingmanufacturingincluding economic laws,laws of physics, metallurgy, control systems,etc.-define them, and teach them to the stu-dents.

BYU bases its manufacturing curriculum on abroad definiticiii which encompasses the total man,ufacturing enterprise: "the series of interrelatedactivities and operations that involve product de-sign, planning, producing, materials acquiSitionand control, quality assurance; management andmarketing of discrete- consumer and producergoods." Manufacturing activities are classifiedinto nine categories: product design activity;marketing; management; material control, manu-facturing engineering, finances and personnel,production, and quality assurance. While thocur-riculurn at BYU focuses primarily on one of thoie

Dell Allen. Professor. Brigham Young University.

activitiesmanufacturing engineeringit alsoattempts to provide a background in the others.

To create the manufacturing curriculum, faculity members drew on their own industrial experi-ence, informal industrial contacts; and a-numberof formal surveys and studies to assess induatrialneed; opinions of manufacturing educatorS, and re-quirement§ of accreditation agencies. After anx-haustive evaluation of the manufacturing disci-pline; the faculty found that the major faeter cli§=anguishing manufacturing engineers from thosein Other disciplines is the ability to do manufac-turing planning and estimating. That ability, inturn; is built on knowledge of materials and met-allurgy, production t5oling, quality assurance; pro-duction information and control systems; plantlayout and material handling, manufacturing Sys-tems and management.

The core courses developed to form the basis ofthe manufacturing technology curriculum are,therefore, those which develop the Skills andImo*ledge required for manufacturing planningand estimating.* These are supplemented by spe-cial education courses in economics, mathematics,statistics and computer science, physical science;and electronics and design technology which pro-vide the students with basic knowledge of othermanufacturing activities related to their discipline.Also required are general and liberal educationcourses.

Program Goals and Objectives.The two majorgoals Of the manufacturing engineering technologyprogram are: 1) to give the students opportunitiesfor individual development; and 2) to prepare themwith the latest knowledge and skills needed to leador supervise personnel engaged in manufacturingoperations; and to help in the development Of newproducts and processes.** To achieve those goals;students are provided with theoretical instructionlinked to extensive application eXperieriCe. Thecore coursework is planned around eight specificareas Of study which correspond to the require-ments for manufacturing planning and estimating

To further refine the curriciiltirii, the faculty_conducleditsurveyofgraduates of 13 manufacturing technology programs,-their managers,and ediitaters item the institutions offering the prograine._Tabulatedresults of the survey were then evaluated by severtexperta who alsovoted on various performance objectives to be maintained in manufac-turing curricula. These perforrnanceobjectives were also incorporatedinte BYL/ manufacturing technology curricula.

**The following comment by a Bechtel Corp. representative shouldbe tned: "The hard, cold,_practical fact is that anyone with any typeof engineering education will aepire to be called an engineer, and thereis not the nice, _clean interface that the educators think there is betweenthesluties of the many people engaged in an engineering-oriented pro-gram. bend esign, construction, manufacturing or operations." (Quotedfizrn Engineering Technology Education Study Final Raport, p. bla

Appendix ASelected Case Studies: Summaries 413

discussed above. These eight areas are: 1) manu-facturing planning, 2) manufacturing processesand materials, 3) manufacturing development, 4)production tool and machine design; 5) productionplanning and control, 6) plant layout and materi-als handling, 7) inspection and quality assurance,and 8) manufacturing management. Specific objec-tives have been developed for each area of study;

Space limitations preclude a full listing of theobjectives listed under each area. The objectivesfor instruction in manufacturing planning, there-fore, will serve as an example. Those objectives areas follows:

To familiarize the student with the functionof discrete component manufacturing sys,tems and the characteristics, analysis, andsynthesis of such systems with emphasis oncomputer-aided manufacturing planning.To aid the student in developing the abilityto analyze parts and products for manufactur-ing feasibility, to plan process operations and

-sequence, to estimate manufacturing costs,and to select manufacturing tools, machines,and equipment.To explore the various technical aspects ofautomation and numerical control systems(including labor-management responsibilities):to give students experience in manual andcomputer-aided numerical control program-ing; and to give them experience working inlocal industries to solve manufacturing prob-lems through the use of mechanization and au-,tomation.

Computer-aided processes and techniques are in-corporated into the couisework when appropriate;it should again be stressed, however, that the un-dergraduate curriculum emphasizes and builds onconventional manufacturing techniques and proc-esses which serve as a foundation for the studyof computer-aided manufacturing.

Facilities and Equipment.The manufacturingtechnology laboratories are distributed throughfour buildings on the campus. The laboratoriessome of which are shared with the Mechanical En-gine3ring and Industrial Education Depart-ments_occripy over 15,000 square feet (total) andinclude facilities for machine-tool operations, fluidpower experiments, casting processes, metal form-ing; metallurgy, quality assurance; materials sci-ence, welding, metal forming, and advanced weld-ing. Also available are a CAD computer area anda large machine-tool-performance and CAM lab;

A comprehensive listing of the conventional andcomputer-aided equipment available to manufac-turing technology students is not consistent withthe space limitations of the present study: Follow-ing is a description of the major equipment itemsin the CAM Laboratory:

a high-performance Evans and Sutherlandgraphics system for use in process simulationand material flow studies;fabrication equipment, including a 3-axis com-puter-controlled milling machine used forundergraduate instruction and for some pro-totype production, and a Sheldon CNC latheequipped with an Allen Bradley controller;two material storage systems,an Eaton Ken-way mini-load stacker and a White Companycarousel unitused in conjunction with themanufacturing program's plant layout andmateriel-handling course. The two systemsare also used for storage of tooling andin-process inventory;an ASEA industrial robot capable of welding,grinding, inspection, assembly and motor re-winding which is used in graduate and under-graduate projects; anda 3-axis Cordax Model 1000 coordinate inspec-tion machine, which will soon be supple-mented byin-process sensorsincluding laserscanning devices and equipment for measur-ing force, temperature, position, and velocity.

The CAM laboratory has three major uses: 1)teaching at both the undergraduate and graduatelevels; 2) R&D conducted by faculty and students;and 3) demonstrations and seminars for faculty,students, and industrial visitors. All of theprodue-tion machines in the laboratory are computer-con-trolled to facilitate the development of a demon-

. stration system in which all of the equipment willbe-networked into a distributed manufacturingsystem via common databases. To develop the pro-posed integratectsystem, the students_ and staffare in the process of setting up a "CAM Mini-Lab"where they can test the integrated manufacturingprocess on a small scale before attempting to usethe full-size industrial equipment. Current equip-ment in the Mini-Lab consists of the following:

An IBM -PC Graphic System used to retrievea given part shape from a data file and to mod-ify the basic dimensions to the required con-figuration. The output is then scaled andplotted on a hard copy device;The part information is then transmitted di-rectly to an Apple CNC Lathe controller that

4 2 6

414 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workiolace

retrieves the cutter path routines to make thepart.A Microbot robot retrieves the part stockfrom an automatic storage and retrieval sys-tem and inserts this part in the lathe chuck.The part itself is then automatically prcichicedon a miniature CNC: lathe. .

In the near future, a miniature computer -con-trolled milling machine; a turret punch for sheetmetals; and a newly designed robot will be addedto simulate a fully integrated production facility.

Currieillum.-=FreShMen be with a course onbasic machine-tool operation and an overview oftheprimary processes and materials used in man:ufacturing. They are also required to take basicgraphics or drafting courses from the design' tech-nology division and an "Introduction to Engineer=ing and Technology" course required of all tech-nology students.- Sophbmore- and junior-year stud-ie§ foCuS primarily on the manufacturing processescourses that form the backbone of the curriculum.These processes include machining, welding cast-ing, forming, molding, and heat-treating, and aresupplemented by "related" technical courses inmaterial science, fluid power, and electronic con-trol, and "supporting" courses in computer sci-ences, mathematics, physics; economics, and tech-nical writing. Sophomores and juniors also takecourses in quality assurance, production planning,and machine-tool performance;

While a number of the freshman- through junior;level courses include sections on computer-aidedmanufacturing techniques, machines; and 'proc-egaesmost notably; the numerical control course,which contains a lengthy section on computer=as-_sisted programing it is not until their senior yearthat students may begin to focus on the curricu-lum's "minor option" in computer-aided design ormanufacturing. At that stage, manufacturing stu-dents interested in design or programing may takeadvanced CAD courses from the design section orcomputer programing courses from the computerscience department. Those interested in computer-aided manufacturing may take courses in robotics,computer -aided materials handling,- computer-aided manufacturing systems, adVanced /WC pro-graming, N/C software development, and grouptechnology.

All of the manufacturing courses have an assn-dated laboratory requirement; and students spendapproximately 50 percent of their time in the lab-oratories applying the theoretical material learnedin the classroom. All students are assigned a num-ber of individual and group projects during the

course of their studies. The projects are'designedto foster analytical and creative problem-solvingcapabilities; to help the students understand theimportance of proper design and 'good manufac-turing planning, and to teach them how to workas part of a development or production team.

A number of these projects are conducted aspart of a senior -level course titled "ManufacturingDevelopment Lab," which is designed to be theculmination of the students' training. Students inthis course are expected to use the concepts andskills learned in previous processes and planningcourses to tool-up and produce usable products,to perform in-depth manufacturing analyses, or en-gage in other prOduttion and planning activitiesidentical to those performed in industrial environ-ments; Products produced by §tudents in the de-velopment lab include an electrically driven wheatmill and parts for a miniaturized _turret punchpress to be used in the CAM Miiii=Lab, togetherwith feasibility studieS on the_manufacture of thepress. Studenta have also participated in jointprojects with industry on-plant layout and mate-riais handling, machinability studies, and grouptechnology and material classification and codingstudies.

Enrollnient Treade.Beginning with two stu-dents in 1960; the manufacturing technology pro.:gram has shown a relatively steady enrollmentgrowth over the past two decades: .With a currentenrollment of 180 students, the program is ex-pected to reach its enrcilliment ceiling of 250 stu-dents by 1985. The manufacturing program hasthe lOwest number of female students of all thetechnology programs (three women are currentlyenrolled) and the highest number of transfers fromother departments. In fact; very few of the Man-ufacturing Technology students enter the programas freshmen; from 30 to 40 percent of the studentstransfer from one of the engineering departnientswhile the remainder come from a variety of othercolleges and departments throughout the univer-sity.

An ongoing project within the manufacturingsection is the development and analysis of manu-facturing student PrtifileS. This study shows thatmost manufacturing students have had from threeto five other majors before taking up manufactur-ing technology, haVe an average of 2 years of in-du§trial experience, and are 26 years old when theytraduate; A recent study of approximately 30manufacturing seniors indiCates a number of sim-ilaritie§ among those studied: their major interestsWere in mechanical things; seeing things work, see-

2

Appendix ASelected Case Studies: Summaries 415

ing how things work, technical _productionmanagement and supervision; and computer pro-graming. Asked to assess their own abilities, thestudents rated themselves high in inventive abili-ty; visualization of interaction among various com-ponents of a process, ability to do practical,"hands-on" engineering, ability to organize andschedule projects, ability to make decisions whennot all the facts are available; ability to work underpressure, and ability to work well with people.

Placement.From 95 to 99 percent of eachgraduating class of manufacturing technologistsfind jobs in industry. Most graduates receive mul-tiple job offers at starting salaries that show asteady increase year by year. Although currentsalary information is not available; surveys of1980-81 graduates show an average starting salaryof $23,500, with salaries ranging from $21,000 to$27,600.

The majority of graduates are employed in theautomotive and aerospace industries, heavy equip-ment manufacturing, computer-related produc-tion, and firms producing high-technology ord-nance materials. Among the companies most ac-tive in hiring BYU manufacturing technologygraduates are IBM, Texas Instruments; Ford;John Deere, Caterpillar, General Dynamics, Gen-eral Electric, Hughes, U.S. Steel, Hewlett Packard,Boeing; Lockheed; and Cummins Engine.

A large proportion of the graduates are hired asmanufacturing engineers; others are classified asindustrial engineers, process engineers, design en-gineers; quality-assurance engineers; research en-gineers, and production engineers. A significantnumber go directly into managementmost asmanagers; some as management trainees: The re-mainder assume a variety of positions and arehired as trainers, estimators, N/C programers, sys-tems analysts, technical service representatives,production_ schedulers, and lab, technicians.

Design Engineering Technology.The designtechnology program was not only the first tech-nology program in the United States to award abaccalaureate degree in design and drafting* butalso the first 4-year program to be certified at theengineering designer level by the American Insti-tute for Design and Drafting (AIDD)** and, along

According to the design technology faculty; many companies hadbeen forced to employ graduate engineers to fill designp_ositions becauseof industry's growing need for qualified technical personnel. The de-sign faculty viewed this process as "counterproductive in view of theengineers' sophisticated training and interests" and developed the de-sign technology program to produce graduate designers specificallytrained to meet the industrial need.

**AIDD is a professional group organized to advance the state ofthe art in the industrial drafting and design community. The institutehas an educational arm which certifies high school, technician-level (2-year), and baccalaureate (4-year design programs.

with BYU's manufacturing technology program;the first 4 -year technology program to be accred-ited by ABET.

As the field of industrial drafting and designadapted to computer-assisted techniques, the de-sign technology faculty attempted; as best itcould4 to keep pace with the rapid industrial;ad-vances. By the early 1970's, students m the designtechnology program were using APT part-pro-graming language to complete manual program-ing and batch processing exercises, keying themanually produced programs onto a Flexiwriterwhich produced machine control tapes that werethen verified on a Gerber plotter. At the sametime, faculty members were actively exploringways of automating the design graphics processesin the program by making contacts with industrialrepresentatives, keeping themselves informed ofthe latest processes and their potential, and at-tending and speaking at professional gatherings;

It was at one such professional meeting-anAIDD conventionthat a design technology facul-ty member was approached by a representative ofApplicon, a major turnkey computer graphicsfirm, who had been impressed by hispresentationdescribing the design program's attempts to in-cbrporate industrial techniques into its curriculum.As a resUlt of that meeting, Applicon eventuallydonated a computer graphics system to the designprogram; The one-terminal Applicon system wasinstalled in 1975 and the faculty began develop-ing_coursework to incorporate commuter -aided de-sign instruction into the curriculum;

During the past 8 years, the relationship be-tween Applicon and BYU's design technology sec-tion has remained strong and has resulted in thedonation of two new Applicon systems. (one ofwhich replaced the original, already-outdated, sys-tem). In addition, because of the curricular ad-vances made possible by -the use of the Appliconsystems for instructional purposes, Computervi-sion, GE-Calma, and other CAD systems haveeither been donated by the producers or providedat a minimal cost to the college (see section on Fa-cilities and Equipment). The design curriculumcurrently taught at BYU would not have been pos-sible had the faculty been less successful in _main--taining industrial contacts and encouraging indus-try to donate equipment

Program Goals and Objectives._The primarygoal of the design engineering technology programis to "expose the student to challenging opportu-nities in mechanical design; including new materi-als, techniques, processes, etc., and thoroughly ao.quaint hini with the current trends, ideology, andtools of technical and computer-generated graph-

4 2 8

. 416 Computerized Manufacturing AutornatiOn: Employment; Education; and the Workplace

ics;" The educational philosophy that supportsthat goal is that "students must have a founda-tion in theory, coupled with viable applications ex-perience; before education becomes truly meaning=ful." That philosophy, Shared by the other sectionsof the technology department, sets the technologydurricula apart from traditional engineering Cur-ricula and results in an instructional program inWhich fully half of the student's work is practical;"hands-on" experimentation and application.

Among the technical objectives of the designprogram are the following: 1) to familiarize the Stu-dent with basic problems in desk development;including documentation and production tech-niques; precision dimensioning and tOlerancing(among these techniqueS are Computer-assisted de-sign, parametric design; and automation withinthe design cycle); 2) to teach basic computer=aideddesign, manufacturing, and engineering (CAD,CAM, CAE) principles; 3) to assist the student inbecoming knowledgeable about the proper use cifmodern production tools; inaChineS, and equip-ment;_ 4) to aid the Student in learning the basicmanufacturing processes and how to achieve eco-nomical production by selecting the Proper link=ess; 5) to acquaint studenta with numerical con-trol systems and their applications; and 6) to pro-vide students with opportunities to participate inactual industry-related deSign_problenis.

Facilities and Equipment. At present; the en-gineering sciences aL6d technology building houseSfour instructional laboratories containing interac-tive graphics and computer-aided design equip-ment. One of these laboratories; called "The Ap-ple Lab," contains a total of 25 microcomputers(including 8 Apples) that are programed to simu-late many of the basic computer graphics func-tions of Computervision or Applicon systems. TheApple Lab is used to train freshmen in the tech-nology and engineering departments in the basicsof computer graphics; Students in more adVancedclasses use sophisticated industrial_ equipmentlocated in the other instructional laboratories;That equipment includes two Applicon 885 multi=workstatioh IMAGE configured systems- (eightworkstations); a Computervision CADDS threemultiterminal system; a Computervision CADDSfour multiworkstation systein; a Celina DDM SyS-tem, also multiterminal; and a Tektronix 4054 sys-tem used principally by electronics students.

Curriculum;In contrast to the manufacturingtechnology curriculumwhich stresses conven-tional manufacturing skills and knowledge in thebeginning of the programs and moves gradually

into computer-oriented processes on the seriior, andgraduate levels7-the design curriculum focuses onComputer-aided techniques and applications fromthe outset. All design students study seven prin=cipal areas,--graphic science standards, problerianalysis, planning, design synthesis, evaluation,documentation,_and application all supplementedby the computer systems in the school..labOratb;ries.

The design program builds on the basic designand drafting skills and knowledge develoPed in therequired freshman and sophomore courses cover-ing the finidamentals of engineering graphics; me-chanical drafting (which includes automated draft=ing techniques); and principles of descriptive ga=ometry. While computer-aided techniques aretaught as !mitt of individual lower-division _courses,half of the required courses for juniors and seniorsfocus entirely on computer graphics and computer -aided design. Two of the six design courses re-quired during the junior year for example, are 1)"Professional Graphics ApplicationsIriteraCtiVeCOmputer Graphica'and 2) "Computer-Aided De-sign Interactive Graphics L"

Professional graphics applications reviews the,.development of computer graphics; covers thefundamental terminology; concepts; and princi-ples of computer graphics; introduces thedents to the uses and applications of 2- and 3 -di-mensional systhms; and tep.ches operationaltechniques ;. Students in this course study thecapabilities and functions of Apple, Applicon,and Computervision systems and complete lab-oratory work focusing on operational techniquesrequired by each system.Computer:aided design--interactive graphics 1provides students with exposure to a broadrange of engineering applications that can be ex-ecuted on CAD systems; trains them to executevendor- prepared applications packages dealingwith engineering problems, and _exposes theinto CAD software development. Among the ap-plitatiOns and techniques studied in this courseare finite element modeling, digitizing, param:etric programing, numerical control part pro-graming, and detailing 3 -D drawings;In their senior year, students are required to

take two other computer-oriented courses:Basic computer- assisted part programing pro-vides. students with a practical working

*This, according to design program faculty, reflects currentpracticein industry. where CAD techniques are more widespread than CAMtechniques.

429

Appendix ASelected Case Studies: Summaries 417

knowledge of APT programing techniques;gives them a frame of reference to help themto understand and implement computer-aideddesign and manufacturing processes; and ex-plores the impact of APT and automation ingeneral on the traditional techniques andphilosophy of engineering graphics;Design techisoftware develop-ment (interactive graphics 2) explores CADsoftware development research techniques,programing; and operation of automated andcomputer graphic equipment with the objectof acquainting students with CAD databasesand database manipulation tools.*

In addition to the required courses, two gradu-ate courses in advanced computer-aided designand advanced CAD applications are open to sen-iors as elective courses (see section on GraduatePrograms).

Enrollment Trends.The design technologyprogram has the highest enrollment of the tech-nology programs. In fact, with a 1982-83 academicyear enrollment of 574 undergraduates, the designfaculty is now in the position of having to intro-duce enrollment controls to eventually reduce thenumber of design students to 300. The primaryreason for adopting this measure is to enable de-sign students to spend a minimum of 5 hours aweek working on the CAD stations. Approximate-ly 30 of the design undergraduates are women, giv-ing this program the highest percentage of femaleenrollment of all the technology programs.

A recent analysis of the enrollment figures (donewhen the enrollment totalled 555) revealed that 77of the design students were freshmen; 119 weresophomores; 155 were juniors; and 204 were sen-ior& The relatively small number of freshmen andsophomores does not reflect an enrollment declineat the lower division level; rather, it reflects Ageneral enrollment trend seen in all of the sectionsof the technology department of upper-divisiontransfers from other disciplines.

Placement Like the other BYU technologyprograms, the design prograni has a placementrate approaching 99 percent. With only occasionalexceptions; those who do not accept immediateemployment in the design field go on to_graduateschool or into the military. One reason fthe high

'Students are also required to take a noncredit "Design TechnologySeminar" each semester. Seminars are held twice a month. Once eachmonth the design technology students join with all students in the col-lege to attend the Engineering College lecture covering a recent topicin engineering: the other monthly meeting addresses recent develop-ments in- computer -aided engineering and is specifically geared for de-sign students.

placement rate is that the faculty actively encour-ages students to work in industry to get applica-tion experience before going on to graduate work.Most students receive two or more job offers; andprogram graduates have been ernployedn the fol-lowing firms (to list but a few): Sandia Laborato-ries, General Electric, Texas Instruments, Boeing,Applicon, Garrott Corp;, John Deere Product En-gineering Center, Hughes Aircraft, General-Dyna---mics, Signetics, U.S. Steel, Martin Marietta, Xer-ox Corp.; Calma Co; Bechtel Power Corp.; West-inghouse, Rocketdyne, and Motorola.

The majority of graduates are employed in en-gineering positions directly after graduation. Spe-cific occupational titles assigned by the ruingcompanies include the following: design engineer,CAD applications engineer, process engineer, man-ufacturing engineer;_CAD/CAM engineer; compu-ter engineer, roe..ket design engineer, software engi-neer, product design engineer; associate engi-neer; and engineer; Others are employed as CAD/CAM programers, software analysts; tool design-ers, CAD support technologists, computer graph=ics specialists; and CAD/CAM consultants.

A_number of graduates are hired as CAD orCAD1CAM managers or as management trainees,and a growing number are hired as CAD/CAMtrainers. Another growing occupational opportunity for which design graduates are well preparedis technical marketing supporta number of re-cent design graduates have been hired as technicalpersonnel who accompany equipment salespeopleto answer the customer's technical questions andto help them make realistic appraisals of whetheror not -CAD and CAM equipment will perform de-sired functions in specific environments.

Graduate Programs.In 1977, the technologydepartment established an M.S. program in com--puter-aided manufacturing. Now retitled compu-ter-integrated manufacturinK(CIM), this programcurrently offers separate options in CAM andCAD and may in the future offer an option in computer-aided testing (CAT) for those students spe-cializing in advanced electronics applications; Therenaming of the CIM program not only madeSpe:-cific options in design and manufacturing availablebut also emphasized the thrust of the program,which is to provide students with training in theuse of specific computer applications (e.g, roboticsand group technology) as the basis for the studyof integrated manufacturing where _a_ variety ofcomputer-aided equipment is linked in a distri-buted system.

--One unusual feature of the CIIVI program is thatover half of its students are professional engineers

430

418 Computerized Manutacturing Automation: EmplOytnent, Education; and the Workplace

and managers ernployed by the Western Electric_Co., who attend condensed, intensive versions ofthe regular school-year courses for 5 weeks eachsummer over a period of 5 years. The remainderof the studenta enrolled in CIM are full-time grad-uate studenta. At present; 30 full-time studentsand 60 Western Electric engineers are enrolled inthe program. The firat eight Western Electricstudents completed their coursework during thespring 1983 term.

In the fall of 1983, the technology departmentbegan to offer another graduate degree programin technical management. This new program offer-ing is the result of a cooperative effort between theCollege of-Engineerin,g_Sciences_and the School ofManagement, and Will Combine MBA courses withtechnical electives from either the technologydepartment or the traditional engineering depart-ments. Students choosing to supplement manage-ment courses with technology coursework will pur-sue the technology management option, while §tti=dents electing to take coursework from theengineering departmenta will folloW the engineer-ing management option. _

Since the technology/engineermg managementprogram has not yet been offered, the remainderof thiS SettiOn will be devoted to the program incomputer-integrated manufacturing.

Program Goals and Objectives: Computer Inte-grated Maiiiifatturin&The major goal of theCIM curriculum is to prepare graduates to inte-grate computerized systems in manufacturing en-vironments, and to do so with a high degree of ef-fectiveness. Specific objectives defined to supportthat goal are the following

to instruct student-1 in the principles; ele-menta, philosophy; a techniques of effectivemanufacturing system design;to aid students in developing_the ability to in-tegrate computerized systems to solve prac-tical, recurring problems; andto provide guidance to students completingthe M.S. thesis requirement, which involvesan in-depth study of a social, economic, ortechnical aspect of computer -aided manufac-turing systems.

Entrance Requirements:.,-The program isspecifically designed for students with recent in-dustrial experience Who wish to develop special-ized skills and knowledge in technical and mana-gerial aspects of computer-aided Manufacturingand design. Applicants must, therefore, have at

least 1 year of relevant industrial experience.*Other entrance requirements include: 1) a bache-lor's degree in engineering technology, or, with theconsent of the department, a B.S. in an allied dis-cipline such as engineering; 2) evidence of com-pleted coursework in manufacturing processes,materials science, design and graphics, electronics;computer programing, physics, and calculus;

Faulty, Facilities, and Equipment. Graduatecourses are taught by approximately two-thirdsof the technology faculty. Facilities and equipmentare the same as those available to undergraduatetechnology majors:

CurricuIELBoth CIM options are structured toaccommodate industrial requirements and to pre-pare Students for advanced workin computer=aided design and manufacturing. While studentsmay create individually focused options within thetwo forinal options (CAD and CAM); specifiedcourses are required to form'a fOundation on whichto base the individualiied program.

CAM OPtion=-Students choosing to specializein computer -aided manufacturing take the follotkr=ing courses:

Computer-aided facility design-and materialshandlingtheory and application of plant lay-out techniques, emphasizing materials handl-ing systems.CNC part programing programing- tech-niques and requirements for the manufactur-ing of components on computer numericalcontrol machining centers, emphasizing pro-graming, applications, and software develop-ment.Group technologyclassification theory andpractice applied to workpiece-ciassification-and-coding and statistics, production in man-ufacturing cells, design retrieval, and gener-ative process planning (all with an emphasison computer applications).Computer-aided manufacturing systems ba-sic activities, elements, and_principles of com-puter-aided _manufacturing,_minology, systems integration, architecture,database development, interfaces, and com-puter h'ardware/software requirements.

The only exception to this requirement is that students who haVecompleted a year of cooperative education experience (which, in riatii-

Wily 8 months _of work experience) are eligible to applit. Thetechnology faculty, however actively encouragesteclumlogy undergrad-uates contemplating this advanced degree to work full-time in indub.try balite upplyingin order to gain u practical understanding of indus-trial practices before beginning graduate work.

Industrial roboticshistory and philosophyof robotics; industrial applications; program-ing, economic justification, and integrationwith production systems.

Students are also required to take a course incomputer-aided design (see below) and a graduateseminar, and may choose from a number of senior-and graduate-level manufacturing, design, andelectronics technology courses or courses in com-puter science, mechanical engineering, or businessmanagement to complete their option.

CAD Option: Students taking the computer-aided design option are also required to take themanufacturing technology courses in group tech-nology and computer-aided manufacturing sys-tems. Two advanced CAD courses are also re-quired:

Computer-aided design: interactive graphics3EAD systems management philosophies;including systems evaluation, cost justifica-tion, procurement procedures, implementa-tion; and management/operator trainingprograms.Advanced CAD applicationsphilosophy,methods, and applications of engineeringtechniques pertaining to present and futuretrends of finite element and solids modeling;complex nuinerical control methods.

Elective coursework may be chosen from allthree curricula of the technology department; thecomputer sciences department, and the mechanicalengineering department.

Electronics Technology Coursework:Althoughthere is, at present, no formal electronics optionin the CIM program, a number of upper-level andgraduate courses that focus on computer-aided ap-plications and techniques are available to studentsin the CIM program. Among these are computer-aided testing and instrumentation; electronics fab-riction and assembly, and real-time sensing andcontrol.*

Research.All CIM students are required to doresearch and write a thesis; preferably on a prac:.tical aspect or application of computer-integratedmanufacturing_ systems. In _practice, areas ofresearch have been very broad. A number of stu-dents participate in ongoing faculty research,while others initiate independent researchprojectsin subjects such as selection of CAD equipment;CAD training, CAD system performance; compu-ter-aided materials selection, carbide selection,

The "Real -Time Sensing and Control" course focuses on writing com-puter language for computer operations that run in real time (i.e., arenot stored by the computer and computed in a batch mode).

Appendix ASelected Case Studies: Summaries 419

finite element modeling, automated steel mills,solids modeling; software quality assessment; andthe cost of product quality and its relation to mar-ket share.

The Western Electric Program.In 1978; Brig-ham Young became one of ahandful of universitiesparticipating in Western Electric's "On- CampusSummer Program," which provides selected West-ern Electric employees with the opportunity to at-tend graduate school on-campus for 4 to 5 weeksduring the summer for a 5-year period. While theother participating universitiesinchiding Clem-son University; Kansas State University; NewMexico State, Purdue, Texas Tech University, andthe. University of Illinoisoffer a variety of ad-vanced-courses; some of which focus on CAD andCAM, Brigham Young is the only one to offer adegree program in computer-integrated LTanufac-turing./Although Western Electric does not re-quire the 60 employees currently attending BYUto enroll formally in the CIM degree program,almost all have chosen to do so. Those who formal-ly enroll in the program must complete the samethesis requirement as all regular CIM graduatestudents, and all of the Western Electricemployees receive the same classroom instructionand laboratory practice. Each summer, twocourses from the CAM option are restructured tofit into an intensive 5-week period so that studentscomplete the equivalent of two 14-week courses.The first eight graduates completed their studiesin the summer of 1983, and two or three additionalstudents were to complete their degree's by the endof the year.

Western Electric covers all of the students' for-mal costs including fees; tuition, housing; andbooksand also reimburses BYU for the salariesof the Technology faculty and staff, and for equip-mentment use and maintenance;-- Enrollment Trends, Attrition,_and Placement.While the number of Western Electric engineersofficially enrolled in the CIM program has goneas high as 60; academic year enrollment is limitedto 30. Of the 30 students currently enrolled in theacademic year program, approximately two-thirdsare graduates of BYU and over half are graduatesof BYU technology programs. Many CIM stu-dents take leaves-of-absence from their companiesto take the coursework; and attempt to completethe thesis requirement after returning to theirjobs. This practice is the primary cause of attri-tion (approximately 33 percent); which often oc-curs after the coursework has been completed andwhen students return to workrather than remain

432

320 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

Dn campus to write their theses. The placementrate for CIM graduates, on the other hand, is 100percent. Average entry-level salaries received byCIM gradutes range from $27,000 to $33,000, al-though some program graduates have received offers as high as $50,000. ,

InduStrial AffiliationsThe technology faculty operates_ on the philoso-

phy that, in meeting the needs of industry it ismeeting the needs of its students The discussionin the preceding section has brought out a numberof ways in which the faoults, has sought industrialadvice, secured industrial donations; and engagedin research that is either industry-oriented or Con=ducted in cooperation with induStry. The follow-ing paragraphs de§eribe specific formal channelsthrough which the technology department commu-nicates with industry and disCuSae§ the depart-ment's position on the forrnatiOn of an industrialadvisory council.

Channels of Communication.=The technolOgydepartment participated with the other depart-ments in the college to form the Alliance With In-dustry. Program in 1981. The 20 companies whoparticipate in the program* each provide an an-nual contribution of $10,000 or more to supportthe college's research and educational programs.Benefits to the industrialpartners include the fol-lowing: 1y licenses for software developed by col-lege faCultY (including high-resolution graphicssoftware developed by a member- f the engineer=ing faculty), 2) research results in methodologyand applicationS, 3) help in solving special indus-trial problems, 4) seminars for technical personnel,and 5) access to BYU_graduatea skilled in compu=ter-aided techniques. Benefits to the college, asidefrom donations of funds and equipment, includeindustrial advice and interaction and the oppor-tunity to do research on current industrial prob-lems.

Apart from its participation in the college-widealliance with industry, the technology departmenthas also formed independent alliances. Each year,the department holds two DCLASS conferencea,one for users who have licensed the software andone for nonusers who are considering purchasinga license. The users conference provides a forumfOr the exchange of ideas and the presentation ofnew DCLASS appliCation§; the non-users confer-

include"These B. F. Goodrich. Boeing. Digital Equipment Corp,Evans & Sutherland, Garrett Corp.. Hewlett Packard, Exxon. GE-Cal-ma, Genrad, GTE. and Computervisien.

ence includes an initial orientation followed bydemonstrations, workshops, and presentations byindustrial representatives who use DCLASS andby technology department faculty.

The Manufacturing Consortium that supportsthe development of CAST hold§ twice -yearly meet-ings to review and approve the instructional mod-ules as they are completed. The industrial mem=bers of the consortium also provide financial re-sources and technical information on the manufac-turing proceSses which are the subject matter ofthe instructional_ packages, and the educationalmembers write the software, participate in thereview process, and help to evaluate the teach-ing/learning process employed.

The Weitern Electric program described earlierin this-study gives the technology faculty an op-portunity to work intensively with engineers andtechnical personnel,- and faculty leave programsallow_ faculty members to renew their workingknowledge of industrial practices by acceptingshort-term employment in industry. In addition,all faculty members take at least_ one trip a yearto attend meetings of _Rrofessional and technicalsocieties. Another fruitful channel of communica-tion is provided by industrial visitors. Literallythousands of industrial representatives visit thedepartment each yearsome to view the facilitie§and equipment, some to deliver or attend Semi-nars, and many to ask advice on computer-aidedequipment and methods.

Evaluation of Present and Future Capacity

When asked to_ evaluate BYU's technology pro-grams on the basis of the skills and ability of theirgraduates, one employer replied: "On a scale of 1to 10, I'd rate them 10.1 Other employers con-tacted agree, noting that BYU graduates not onlyhave "just the; right education," but often requireleSs on-the-job orientation training than tradition-ally educated engineers, and are also more matureand more willing to Work extra hours and at oddhour§ than most engineers fresh_out of college.

The Rocky Road to Success.Evaluated withrespect to its own stated goal of_preparing stu-dent§ for positions requiring applied engineering,process planning, and systems management skills,the BYU technology department clearly is highlysuccessful. Its present capacity to provide itsStudents with the CAD and CAM skills sought byincreasing numbers of induatrial firmS is perhapsbest described by the adage, "success breeds suc-cess." Because the faculty has been able to obtain

Appendix ASelected Case Studies: Summaries 421

industrial donations, state-of-the-art equipment,industrial advice, and real-world research problemsfor its students to work on, BYU technology grad-uates are sought after by industry. And becauseof the graduates' success in industry and the facul-ty's achievements in research, the technology de-partment now has more offers of equipment andindustrial research projects than it can handle andis in the position of giving advice to companies lesstechnologically advanced than it is

A look at the history of the technology depart-ment since its inception in 1960, however, revealsthat its present -day success story grew out of aCinderella tale: When the baccalaureate programswere first established, and for many years after-wards, the members of the technology faculty sawthemselves as "underdogs:" They were lookeddown upon by many of the engineering faculty,and unrecognized by most ottherest of the univer-sity, and their 4-year _programs were often. con-fused with the 2-year technician programs also of-fered by the technology department at that time.Industry-oriented and intent on filling the gapcreated by the increasingly theoretical focus oftraditional engineering education, the technologydepartment resisted promptings by en&ieeringsocieties, accreditation agencies, and some of thecollege faculty to "add more courses the studentswouldn't need in industry in order to become ac-creditedit wasn't worth the tradeoff."

Eventually; the manufacturing and design pro-gramswhich substituted application-oriented,laboratory-based courses for the most highlytheoretical coursework in engineering disci-plinesbecame the first accredited technologyprograms in the country. Although accreditationwas beneficial to both the students and the facul,ty, it did not solve their problem of being lookedupon as either second-rate engineers or as super-technicians. However; the department's industrialfocus and the faculty members desire to provethat neither they nor the discipline of technologywere '"poor relations" were significant factors inthe department's early concentration on computer-aided design and manufacturing.

Because the programs were designed to teachstate-of-the-art industrial skills and applications,the faculty began exploring ways of obtainingequipment and incorporatingproammable auto-mation into the curricula approximately_10_yearsago, when it became clear to them that CAD andCAM would eventually become required fields ofknowledge. Furthermore; because the programs'curricula were not bound by engineering accredita-

tion requirements, which allow little space in a4-year curriculum for the inclusion of new courses,coursework focusing on CAD and CAM could beincorporated into the technology curricula withrelative ease.

The final hurdle for the technology departmentwas industry itself. Faculty members went fromcompany to company in the early 1970's, but didnot succeed in obtaining donated or reduced-priceequipment until they proved their genuine interestand capability by demonstrating to Applicon thattheir students were doing all that could be doneto automate the drafting courses with the limited--equipment at their disposal. It was at this stage,when the department received its first major dona-tion (the Applicon CAD system) that Cinderellawas allowed to try on the glass slipper. The otherslippera $130,000 Kerney & Trecker CNC mill-ing machine, which the company sold to the de-partment for $50,000was fitted shortly there-after,,,,, These two significant equipment additionsenabled the faculty to begin to incorporate sophis-ticated computer-aided techniques into the course-work; they also encouraged other firms to donatefunds and equipment.

Technology and Engineering:1Interdepartmental Relationships

v Once it "proved itself," the situation of the tech-nology department improved both iriSide and out-side the university. Although perfect accord be-tween engineering and technology faculty mem-bers is not always achieved even now, the vast ma-jority of faculty members in the college viewengineering and technology as partner-disciplines,both of which are necessary to provide the broadspectrum of education and training required toprepare graduates for engineering and engineer-ing-retated positions in industry. CiVil, mechanical,and electrical engineering students are now re-quired to take design: technology courses; andmany engineering students take courses from allthree technology programs as technical electives.

Technology students were always required totake engineering courses relevant to their majorprogramL-and a third to a half as many physics,chemistry, and mathematics courses as engineer-ing students,. There has been limited discussionabout increasing the number of statics, dynamics,and strength-of-materials courses taken by tech-nology majors to equal those taken by engineers;and there is some discussion about increasing the-numbers M physics and mathematics courses in

3 4

422 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

the technology curricula.* As the commonality be-tween technology and engineering curricula grows,more and more students and faculty perceive thedifference between the two disciplines to be oneof approach and, mission, rather than one of levelof education.

Computer-Aided Eitgiiiee_rin_g, Design,and Manufacturing (CAEDM) Committee

Both technology and engineering faculty nowfeel that they have 'an excellent relationship witheach other, in contrast to the situation in manyother universities which have both programs. TheCAEDM Committee; created in 1980, provides aformal channel of communication between thetechnologists and engineers, and a number of pro-fessors in both departments coordinate researchprojects in which technology and engineeringgraduate students work together as part of a re-search team. College faculty believe that this teamapproach has a great deal of significance for aca-demia and industry alike.**

The BYU technology department whose pri-= =mary focus is on the implementation of engineer-

ing designshas been instrumental in increasingthe engineering departments' awareness of theneed to produce industrial designers who are morecognizant of manufacturing concepts 'and require-ments. One tangible example of interdepartmen-tal cooperation in this area is a CAEDM-sponsoredshort-course for faculty and students delivered bya representative from GE, which has instituted aversion of a Japanese procedure that rates engi-neering designs on the basis of ease and efficien-cy of assembly. Another example is the work nowbeing done in the CAM Mini-Lab, where electricaland mechanical engineering students; computerscience students, and technology students all par-ticipate in projects addressing the manufacturingprocess from design to production and the prob-lems of networking diverse CAD and CAM equip-ment.

*There is some disagreement among the technology_ faculty_on_theissue of increasing the math and physics courses. which would entaileither extending the technology corrickaabeyond the !hints of 4-yearprograms, requiring students to take more courses each semester, ordropping coursea_that the majority of the faculty consider to be essen-tialfor technologists.

!!"A perennial problem in industry has been lack of communicationbetween en sneers who design the products and the manufacturing de-Partments_r ,sponsible for production. Because of this lack of commu-nication. and 'because engineers normally receive little formal educationin the requirer, its of the manufacturing process, industrial designersoften fail to take -nrmufacturing requirements into account when design-ing producta procedure that can lead to loss of money, loss of pro.duction time, or tin the worst instance) a product which cannot be man-ufactured.

The technology department also stimulated theengineering departments' interest in CAD andCAM, which, in turn, was a stimulUS for the Cur=rent focus on computer-aided engineering (CAE).The college as a whole has also benefited from theindustry interest generated by the teehnology pro-grams and graduates. Much of the computer-aidedeguipinent obtained by the technology departmentserves the entire college, and:the engineering de-partments have now obtained computer graphicsand computer-aided data acquisition and analysisequipment through industrial donations and coop-erative agreements with equipment manuftietuicers. In addition, the growing reputation of thetechnology department in industrial circles hasbrought in interviewers from across the countrywho hire engineering as well as technologygraduates.

The Alliance With Industry_ Program, formedunder the auspices of CAEDM, brbught the imi;versity $1,858,000 in industrial equipment and infunds used to augment the computer-aided _cape,bilities of the college. In April 1983, CAEDMhosted a conference for 380 representatives from120 universities across the country who are eitherplanning or developing programs in computer-aided manufacturing, design, and engineering.Thirty speakers from 25 universities that have ini-tiated such programs gave presentations on theapproach taken at their respective institutions;and all of the participants had the opportunity todiscuss common problems; individual experiences,and appropiate strategies. The objeet of the Con=ference, called University Programs for. Computer-Aided Engineering; Design and Manufacturing(UP CAEDM) was to increase communicationamong universities and to provide impetus for theimplernentatiOn of teaching and research' pro-grams in CAD CAM, and CAE.

Problems.While cooperative endeavors likethose mentioned above have brought the facultyof the technology and engineering departments to-gether, the college is not entirely free of the tratli=tional misunderstanding among _engineers andtechnologists; Some of the technology faculty stillhear the scars of old battle wounds and refer tothe "arrogance" of the engineering discipline:asa whole, and to the "old boys' club" atmospherethat links engineers nationwideond PYcludes_tech-nologists. They consider their own college educa-tion in traditional engineering schools to have"rnistrained" them, for industrial occupations.Some engineering faculty, on the other hand, re-sent_aent the fact that most technology departmentgraduates are classified as "engineers" when they

435

Appendix ASelected Case Studies: Summaries 423

move into industry; they fear that such graduatesmay be "misrepresented" as degreed engineers.Another problem for the engineering faculty isthat a number pf visitors from industry and aca-demia overlook the computer-aided engineeringfacilities and devote their entire attention to theCAD and CAM facilities of the technology depart-ment; The resentments on both sides are; however;gradually being overcome by the spirit of coopera-tion that now exists within the college. They arebut pale reflections of national tensions betweentechnologists and engineers.

Working With Industry.Having designed itsprograms to respond to industrial needs and hav-ing concentrated on industrially oriented research;the technology department is now able to workwith industry on many levels. The continuing suc-cess of the Western Electric program and the sat-isfaction of the Western Electric employees whoattend the summer sessions indicate the suitabili-ty of the technology curricula to current industrialneeds; as do the multiple job offers received bytechnology graduates. The growing number ofcompanies purchasing DCLASS licenses and :Ix-hibiting interest in the CAST system indicate thatthe research performed by technology departmentfaculty and students also fills an industrial need.Some faculty members; in fact; are in the positionof being able to pick and choose from a large num-ber of potential industrial research projects.

Because of the similarity of interest betweentechnology department faculty and professionalsin industry, and because of past success in re-search aimed at sohing current industrial prob-lems; individual faculty members have been ableto engage in long-term research projects resultingin a number of shorter-term benefits to industry.DCLASS; for example; is now put to use by a num-ber of firms for classifying and retrieving informa-tion and for generating process plans, time stand-ards, and a number of other applications. At thesame time; the creator of DCLASS is conductinglong-term research into the potential use ofDCLASS as a systems integration tool.

Revenues from the sale of DCLASS licenseshave helped to buy equipment and renovate facil-ities and may soon be augmented by the sale ofCAST training modules and the CAD trainingaides that allow Apple computers to simulate in-teractive graphics systems. In many instances, thedepartment has been able to save the expense ofmaintaining computer- aided equipment by writ-ing software programs for equipment vendors inexchange for maintenance services.

2-5-451 0 - 84 - 38 : QL, 3

The major problem-area still remaining for thetechnology department in respect to working withindustry is the attitude taken by some firmstoward the occupational categories appropriate fortechnology graduates; This is discussed in the fol-lowing section.

Future Capacity.Judged by its present suc-cess; the direction of the faculty's research; andits determinatior to maintain its awareness of in-dustrial needs and techniques, the future poten-tial of the technology department to continue pro-ducing well-trained graduates versed in computer-aided techniques and familiar with a wide rangeof computer-aided equipment seems high indeed.The major limitation is the small size of the depart-mentwhich, because of enrollment control; willbecome smaller stilland difficulties encounteredin managing the growing numbers of computer-aided systems; which entail coordinating frequentupgrades and updates with the student need forequipment time.

Although college and university administrationshave been generous in assigning funds to upgradeold facilities and build new ones for the technologyand engineering departments; the technology de-partment's resources cannot expand to accommo-date all of the activities it would like to engage in.For example, a number of companies have re-quested that the department operate programs fortheir employees on the model of the Western Elec-tric program. The department has had to turndown these requests for lack of resources; It will;however, attempt to offer a series of 2-day to 1-week seminars for industrial employees focusingon computer-aided design and manufacturing.

A general policy of the department and of theuniversity is to sacrifice size for quality. The newenrollment control procedures, for example, will ef-fectively close off enrollment for the Design Pro-gram for the next year or two but will also resultin more CAD-terminal-time for those students al-ready enrolled; Of the three technology prograihs,manufacturing 4xhibits the greatest capacity forfuture enrollment growth (student interest hasbeen fueled by the national interest in productivi-ty and the potential of computer-aided manufac-turing), while the electronics program has thegreatest potential for expanding its curriculum toinclude new courses focusing on computer-aidedequipment and techniques. The Electronics facul-ty has already acquired six IIP87XM computer-aided test stations -to be used as personal instru-ment systems, and a Tektronic 4054 computergraphics system for printed circuit board design.

4 3 6

424 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education; and the Workplace

Future departmental plans call for an ECAM(Electronics-CAM) minilab to be established in thenew technology building when it is completed.

The technology department, in cooperation withthe mechanical engineering department and theelectrical engineering department, developed a pro-posal _for a three-element graduate program inmanufacturing system§ in response to IBM's an-nouncement that it would provide college and uth-versity grants for the development of curric-ula in manufacturing teChniqueS. BYU has re- _ceived notice that it has been awarded an IBM4341 computer system with 10 CADAM graphicsterminals. This system will ha e a signifiCant im-pact on the capacity of the three departments andof the college as a whole to train more studentsthan they can presently accomModate.

The technology department'S potential capaci-ty to provide education in progranamable automa-tion is not entirely limited by the size of the depart -'ment, if one considers the indiract impact of theprograms as models for other schools, the willing-ness and ability of the faculty to provide informa-tion to academia and industryllike, and the poten-tial of-the-computer ;aided simulation trainingpackages and the CAM-Mini/Lab concept;

B YU Technology Programs as Models for OtherEducational Institutions. The manufacturingtechnology prograni has been used for many yearsby the Society of Manufacturing Engineers as arecommended model for 4-year nianufEictifring pro=grams. In additibn, representatives of 15 to 20 col-leges and universities visit the BYU technologydepartment each year with the expressed intentionof _creating their own programs on the BYU model.

Technology- department faculty representativesoffer the following comments on the feasibility ofsuch attempts. While they have personal knowl-edge of a number of successful programs modeledon their own; they point out that the crucial re-quirements for a program like theirs are often metonly with difficulty. The first reqpirement, fromtheir point of view, is the necessity of "giving upthe title of manufacturing engineering in order togive industry what it really wants." This is a stepthat a number of engineering schools do not wishto take.*

Once this step is decided upon, other pitfalls_ eit-iSt. One is the tendency of some schools to placemanufacturing technology programs in the depart---- -----

*According to one technology instructor, You can't take trUe-bluetheoretical engineer and expect him to teach technology; if you do;there's a danger that the faculty will make the technology courses tootheoretical and the students will wind up with a pseudo - technology de-

gree.''

ment of mechanical engineering and to offer themas options. The danger here, according to BYU fac-ulty, is that the technology program is then like-ly to become a watered-down engineering programrather than a parallel-track program. Another ne-cessity is that each course in the curriculum be ac-companied by an associated laboratory require-.ment; This means,, of course, that appropriateequipment and facilities be available. Another ma-jor requirement is that the faculty have industrial_experience and be comfortable teaching a le§Stheoretical, practically oriented curriculum. Thefinal requirement is interest on the students' part;While faculty can help to generate that interest,it could be difficult to do so in a strong traditionalengineering college where students are bent on be-coming degreed engineers and have little interestin less theoretical studies.

TeohnolOgy Transfer. The technology depart-mentand, especially since the formation ofCAEDM, the college as a wholehas been, andwill most likely continue to be, an excellent cbn-duit for technology_ transfer. The faculty demon-strates astrong determinatoa to continue to learnfrom industry and an equally strong desire toshare what they have learned and their methodol-ogy of teaching with other educational institu-tions; The UP CAEDM conference, in particular,has the potential of becoming a regularly occur-ring event: the second such conference is beinghosted on the East Coast by Lehigh University in1984. If that potential is reallied, BYU will haveprovided the impetusfor a sorely needed forum forcontinual exchange of information.*

Technology department faculty also expre§§ theintention of continuing the present practice ofworking as consultants to industrial. firms andgovernment agencies and of providing informal ad=vice and services to industry representatives whoVisit the department to obtain information onCAD/CAM systems and applications. Thus, thetechnology transfer provided by the technologydepartment and other departments in'the collegeis likely to continue to operate on multiple levelsto the benefit of BYU; other academic institutions,and industry,

Computer -Based and Computer-Aided Instruc-tional Packages. As modules of the Computer=

An informal survey- conducted by this researcher of selected collegesand universities revealed an astonishing lack of knowledge about theactivities of other institutions on the art of faculty numbers activelyengaged in planning or developing CAD and CAM programs. Whilesome faculty members contacted did have some information about_dx-feting programs in colleges and universities; they often did not_ knowthe direction and IOCUB of those other programs or hid inattequate information abbut specific research and curriculum development actiVities.

431

Aided Simulation Training System (CAST) arecompleted and approved by the ManufacturingConsortium; they will be made available to indus-tries and educational institutions for a minimal fee(Covering the cost of reproduction and mailing).The manufacturing technology professor respon-sible for devoloping and coordinating the project

1 is hopeful that within the next year, videodisk/ technology in the United States will be well

, enough advanced to allow the CAST developmentteam to produce the training modules on interac-

/ tive videodisks. At present, a demonstration yid-/ eodisk has been produced for use in further re-

/ search studies on interactive instruction, andsound-slide presentations of some of the modulesare being tested in manufacturing technologyclasses at BYU. The CAD training package for useon Apple computers is also in the developmentstage, and one of the design technology faculty hasformulated a concept for computer-aided CAD in-struction which he hopes to develop in the nearfuture.

CAM Mini Lab.Technology department facul-ty are also seeking funds to enable them to build

Appendix ASelected Case Studies: Stimmaries 425

i

duplicates of the miniature factory that will be con-tained in the CAM Mini Lab and to provide themto 20 universities across the country: The recipi,ent universities would be encouraged to attend"software exchanges," whereby advances made byone party would benefit the group as a whole. Theestimated cost of producing the hardWare for oneminilab is $50,000, which is equal to or less thanthe cost of many single items of computer-aidedequipment.

Projects such as those mentioned above expandconsiderably the department's potential capacityto have a direct effect on education and trainingin the field of programmable automation: TheDCLASS_users and nonusers conferences, theWestern Electric program, and short courses forprofessional engineers offered by the engineeringdepartments further expand the college's abilityto reach beyond the university campus to provideeducational opportunities to working profes-sionals.

426 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: EmplOyment, Education, and the Workplace

Case Study 3'CADAM CUStOmer Traihihg

in CotnpaterAidedDesign

SummaryCADAM Inc:, a subsidiary of Lockheed Corp.,

produces col &Sign and manufactur-ing (CAD/CAM) software, most of which is li-censed to customers through IBM and other com-puter hardware firms. Customer§ may also buyCAD/CAM software directly froM CADAM foruse on systems that are "plug-compatible" withIBM systems.

CADAM provideS basic_ computer graphicstraining free of charge to all customers whb pur-chase software directly from the firm (two employ-ees per customer) and charges $1,250 per studentfor basic training clasSes to all customers who li-cense the software through IBM or other hard-wire distributors. Customers may also purchaSethe basic training in self§tudy packages for $6501:r. kit. The software firm offers more than 11 com-puter graphics programs; ranging from basic train-ing in the CADAM system of cdinputer:aided_de-§ign, to courses on 343 piping and 3-D surfaces;to numerical control (NC) programing, to finite ele-ment modeling.

In addition, CADAM offers a training consult-ing service deigned to assist customers who haveunique problems or special requirementa. All train=Mg beyond CADAM basic_ is delivered for a fee,Which ranges from $550 to $3;100 per student, de-pending on the length and complexity Of thecourse. The majority Of Student§ are machinists,desig-ners, drafters, and engineers.

While CADAM provides both in-pIant trainingfor all of its employees and what is referred to as

scope" training (training on the computer termi-nal in the operations required to use variousCADAM® system ware packages),* thiS Studywill focus primarily on the customer training of-fered by the firm. When it was established in Jan,uary 1982, its Lockheed Corp. founders committedthemselves to providing "high quality training"Which they saw as crucial to support the companygoal of becoming a major developer and-distribu-tor of software in the CAD/CAM field. Today, thetraining departmentWhich includes curriculum

'CADAM is a registered trademark and service mark Of CADAM

designers, internal trainers, and customer trainersaccounts for 8 percent of all CADAM employees

(an unusually high percentage); and the directorof training reports directly to the president of thefirm. This again, is unusual, _since most trainingdepartment§ report-through marketing; customerrelations; or personnel. _

- Company Characteristies.=-4is of July 1983,CADAM employed approximately 280 people inits four major divisions: software development,marketing; training, and administration. Seventy=five percent of CADAM employees are in the soft-Ware division; marketing and training have 10 per-cent each and the remaining B percent are in ad=ministration. At present, the firm opeiatea out ofone facility, located near the Lockheed-Californiaplant m Burbank; Calif. CADAM managementplans to increase the software division by 40 em-plciyee§ during the latter part of 1983 and to-main-tain the training department at its current level.

The decision to incorporate what was once Leek=heed's CADAM divi§ion* WAS fueled by the per-ceived necessity of providing CADAM manage-ment with the flexibility, it needed to operate ina fast-moving CAD/CAM marketplace with a wideVariety of Ocitential customers in aerospace; ship-building automakingacitectuaptannin gnghada number of other industrieS. DistinguishingCADAM from the majority of CAD software andsoftware- hardware houses is the firm's concentra-tion on developing software for mainframe CAD/CAM systems, specifically the IBM 370, 303X,and 4300 series, rather than for turnkey; or stand-alone; systems utilizing minicomputers.

According to company representatives, the ad-vantages of mainframe as opposed to turnkey sys-

'in 1967, the original CADAM SeftWare Was \developed by LOck-heed-California engineers to aid in the numerical Central (NC) pi-6gram-ing and airframe deSigh for Lockheed Aerospace Products. CADAMsystem software was MiginallY Created for uez IBMitiWrifraines.but by the iiiid--1970's,-Leekheeil had a1-so designed_a CADAM pack-age for use-on-Perkin Either riiihlediiiOuteit; By 1976, Lockheed wasselling- CADAM System software to users outside of Lockheed Corp. -BY 4979. iii addition talnarketing the a yetem,IBM also adoptedCADAM as its internal CAD/CAM software. IBM and Lockheed en-tered into _a contractug arreigement in 1977 whereby IBM would mar-ket and distribute CADAM system software under -the Ism installeduser. program (IUP), which makes software developed by IBM usersavailable to the general public.

439

terns are increased database capability and theability to network CAD/CAM databases (includingthe ability to transfer data between CAD andCAM systems), the ability to interface to other in-formation systems, the greater growth capabilityOf mainframes (to which over 100 terminals can beconnected); greater telecommunications capabili-ties between far-flung terminals, and the increasedspeed. ateuracy, and computing ability offered by32-bit (mainframe) as opposed to 16-bit (minicom-puter) systems.* By offering these featureS,CADAM believeS it has a solution for an entire en-terprisenot merely a department or group:

According to CADAM's president; CAD/CAMtechnology is most prOfitablY and productivelyused by firms that are not merely seeking to au-tomate single processes; such as design drawingsor NC part programing, but are instead deVeltip:ing the capability to make their &Sign and manu-facturing processes into a single integrated sys-tem: CADAM management thus views the firm'smajor role as that of a systems catalyst, since theyMaintain that CAD/CAM systems can, when usedby knowledgeable users; become the backbone ofa computer-integrated manufacturing (CIM) Sys=tern. In thiS Sense, CADAM has two major mar-kets: firms that use CAD or CAD/CAM systemsfor some processes; and; most important, firniSthat are in the process of developing integrated-system capabilities. At present; CADAM has over250 corporate users; including IBM (with almost100 installations and several hundred terminalsthat make use of CADAM software); GM andother American firms; the majority of the largestJapanese automakers and shipbuilders, and fir-MSthroughout Western Europe, Canada, South Af-rica, -and South America:

Training Organization and PhiltistiPliY.=Ltick:heed-California began CADAM system trainingfor employees in the late 1960's; shortly after theCADAM product was _developed Lockheed in-structors have been delivering CADAM systemtraining since 1975, when software packages werefirst sold to outside users: As a company; then,CADAM had the advantage of Starting out witha track reCord of training both customers and em-ployees on a system that had been used h produc-

Man_y of the major turnkey vendors, however, are coming out with32bit minicomputers, which, according to Merrill Lynch's 1982 CAD/CAM Reyiew and Outlook, "appear capable of stemming the inroadsof mainframe computer competition" Ip. 1). While mainframes havemore CPU power and speed, the new 32-bit mini systems offer moreextensive applicationssoftware and, except for "high-end large sophis-ticated needs.'` are superior to mainframes in price/performance com-parisons Ip. 9).

Appendix ASe:ected Case Studies: Surntnaties

Lion environments for over 15 years; it also intited 10 Lockheed-developed CADAM training rgrams and a number of experienced trainers.

Top Priority Accorded to Training.Accordto CADAM's president, training was an integpart of the strategic business plan created pito CADAM's incorporation. Convinced that ctomer supportincluding training, curricular aand consulting services-was a major requiremfor success in the CAD/CAM field, CADAM magemerit set out to establisha training departrnthat would provide curricular materials and trzing of a consistently high quality. The new diitor of training and education, hired in Novem1981, was given a mandate to produce qualtraining and to turn the training department i]a profit center for the firm. As- head of oneCADAM's four major divisions;Ane directortraining reports 'directly to the president offirm and has both flexibility (in structuringtraining department, hiring trainers and progrdesigners, and organizing and developingtraining material) and accountability (for proding "qiiality product support" and for turninprofit).

CADAM manageinent believes that a systenchecks and balancesinvolving cooperationtween trainers and designers and between the SIware division and the training division, as wellaccountability on the part of each division toothers and to top managementproduces a fcof "Quality assurance" whereby the product itis designed with users and training requiremein mind, and the training effort supports the sand use of the software:

.Relationships With_ Educational InstitutionfAside from the training division's informal ritionShip with the University of Southern Caliima's (USC's) Instructional Technology Deinment, _CADAM has numerous cooperative ritionships with colleges and universities in Caliinia and throughout the country: In Septeml1982; IBM announced its intention to award Smillion worth of grants of hardware and of finto university and college engineering schoolsdevelop new curricula in manufacturing teniques. CADAM intends to supplement the IIhardware donations with donations of softwlicenses:

Independently of the IBM grant, CADAMmites software to a number of universities andlege8, to be used in teaching CAD/CAM ftrndaxntalc; and occasionally provides CADAM train]to selected colleges and universities for free or

4 4 u

428 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

a reduced rate. A more active relationship existsWith a smaller number of schools to whichCADAM also provides test releases of software.This arrangement gives student§ experience insolving software problems While, at the same time,aiding CADAM software analysts in debuggingthe software; With yet other institutionsUCLAand Rensselaer PolytechhiC Inatitiite for -021-arri-

pleCADAM has engaged in joint developmentwork. UCLA's Department of Manufacturing En-gineering has received grants of IBM hardwareand CADAM software, which it has integratedinto the curriculum of three separate courses.CADAM and UCLA manufacturing engineeringfaculty and graduate students are also engaged injoint research to determine how to classifyCADAM-made drawings into part families byusing group technology &idea, with the ultimateobject of developing an integrated manufacturingplanning system.

Another cooperative projectconducted byUCLA aims to narrow the traditional communica-tions gap between the design and manufacturingdepartments in industries by designing a "siriart"CAD system that will monitor the design processand prompt the designer if he bypasses manufac-turing considerations while desigPing_a part, tool,or product. Another UCLA=CADAM project in-volves research into incorporating three-dimen-sional graphics capabilities into CADAM systemsoftware;

Other_ educational institutions with whichCADAM maintains a close working relationshipinclude Rensselaer_Polytechnic Institute, Michi=gan Technological Institute, MIT, and CaliforniaPolytechnic State University. Section III of thisstudy discusses possible future projects with Col=leges and universities which may have a direct im-pact on CADAM system training itself and on theeducational offerings of participating schools:

Training Division Staff. The training divisionconsists of the director of training, the internaltraining group, the customer training group, theprogram (Le.; curriculum) designers, and three §upiport personnel.

The training director, who was in computer salesfor IBM from 1956 to 1969 and then moved intothe industrialtraining field as an early employeeof Trateeli (a for-profit training firm) and a train-ing consultant, combines experience in the com-puter and training fields with formal training asan accountant. The remainder of the professionalstaff_ in the training division is approximatelyequally split between employees with advanced

degrees in instructional design, education, or thesciences, and employees with practical experienceWorking on and teaching the CADAM system.

The manager of customer training is a long-timeLockheed employee previously a drafter/designer)who was trained as a drafting designer onCADAM when it was first put into use in the late1960's. A trainer in the CADAM system since theearly 1970'S, he became manager of customertraining shortly after moving to CADAM from theLockheed training department. Five of the sixtrainers combine production experience asCADAM System designers with experience asCADAM system trainers for Lockheed. The seniorinstructor has 20 years Of training experience, 15Of Which were spent training Lockheed employeesand customers on the CADAM system.

The manager of the program design staff haScompleted advanced graduate work in the USC in-Structional_ technology department and workedpreviously as a manager for another firm. The fourprogram designers also have graduate_ and/orteaching experience in instructional technology atUSC ( e was an instructor, one an-assistant pro-fess° ; and one also has 10 years of industrial ex-Peri CO. All have had extensive experience in writ-ing instructional curricula:

The difference in backgrounds between thetrainers and the program designers reflectsCADAM management's position that CADAMemployees should specialize in what they do beat=that trainers shduld be practitioners with engineer-ing or miopfloor experience and that curriculumdevelopers should be trained communication spe-cialists. The horizontal nature of CADAM's inter-nal organization=-whereby, trainers, program de,signers, and software developers are on parallelorganizational levelsis intended to encouragecooperation and to make all technical-levelemployees accountable for portions of product de-velopment and support.-

'Training Facilitieg.:=Approximately half of allthe customer_ training is delivered at CADAM'straining facility; located at the CADAM plant andalso used for employee* Group II mainframe com-puter, *hich is Shared with the marketing group;

Customer TrailiagGoals;Major goals of CADAM customer train:

ins are to provide a high level of training supportto the customers and to do so on a profitable'basis.

The remainder of the training is delivered onsitO at the Customer'slocation

Appendix ASelected Case Studies: Summaries 429

Recognizing that the CADAM system cannot beeffectively utilized by customers Who have notbeen properly trained and that well-trained usersare those most likely to be satisfied with the system and to expand their use of it, the training di-rector established the program design departmentto support these goals with its own particular setof objectives.

These objectives are to develop a om e setof training tools for each customer g pro-gram, to make those tools (written curricula, studyguides, training guides, training aids, etc.) as con-sistent as _possible both in content and delivery,to package appropriate courses as self-study pro-grams to reduce training costs, and to develop newinstructional programs to keep pace with softwaredevelopment and new software applications. Thetrainers' goals are to make sure that the studentshave a basic understanding of how the CADAMsystem operates and a specific understanding ofthe particular application package they are beingtrained to operate.

Contractual Arrangements With Customers.When CADAM sells or leases software licenses di-rectly to end-user customers, free basic terminaloperation training is provided for two customeremployees. Intermediate terminal operation train-ing and other CADAM training courses are thenavailable to these customers for a fee.

Direct licensing makes up the smallest portionof CADAM sales; By far the largest distributionis through IBM, with which CADAM has threeseparate contracts: one for software licensing, onefor software development and enhancement; andone for training; Under current contracts, IBMmarkets both CADAM system software andCADAM system training, and primary responsi-bility for provision of training and other supportrest with IBM, which contracts with CADAM foractual training delivery. Responsibility for sched-uling customers into training classes is alsoIBM'S: CADAM provides IBM with a projected 6-month schedule of training courses, and IBMschedules customers into available classes; Thecontractual relationship with Perkin Elmer andFujitsu are somewhat different than with IBM.

Program Design.The principles of "instruc-tional design"* will eventually be used in all of

" Instructional Technology" or "Instructional Design" was originallydeveloped in the late 1940's and early 1950's as a means of systemataing training and educational programs. It incorporat-es psychology, so-ciology, adult education, and other ciis' ciplines to create instructumalprograms that tare into account such factors as audience maeup. levelof learning, educational levels and occupationW background of the stu-dents, and their responses to the type of training or education provided(e.g.. responses to learning to work on computers). A consortium of

CADAM's training programs; At present; twocourses have been fully revised by the program de-signers: 1) CADAM basic, and 2) 3-D piping, a newcourse designed for a software application pro-gram for the construction of pipe runs and spooldiagrams. Four additional courses basic II, anal-ysis, CADAM implementation, and CADAM in-stallationwere to be ready by the third quarterof 1983. As applied by CADAM designers, instruc-tional design provides a systematic approach todefining; developing; and evaluating training pro-gramsan approach which attempts to combineflexibility with an organized structure. The in-structional design system is usable both for --

creating new programs and for revising old train-ing material.

The instructional design system used byCADAM designers is a nine-part process which;in the case of the revision of CADAM basic train-ing, took approximately 9 months to complete.The process is broken down into three major func-tions: 1) definition of the problem or situation, 2)development, and 3) evaluation.

Customer Training Programs.*CADAM offers atotal of 11 customer training programs plus atraining consulting service. This section describesthe basic terminal operations course.

Basic Terminal Operations.C4DAM's basictraining program is offered approximately twicea month. Previously a 4-day course serving fourstudents per class; CADAM Basic is now a 5-daycourse which can accommodate _four toleight stu-dents and can be taught by CADAM instructorsor trainers from customer firms, or can-be-used asa self-study package; When delivered by CADAMtrainers, the basic course is priced at $1,250 perstudent; when sold as a self-study package, thecost is $650 per study kit with additional work-.books priced at $70 to $150 each.

Course Goals.The major goals are to teachstudents to use the basic functions of the CADAMsystem to create engineering drawings and to un-derstand the basic concepts and purposes of thesystem as applied to their own professional needsand work environments;

universities (including USC, Michigan State, Syracuse University. the ,

University of I ncliana. and Florida State) have developed fully fledgedgraduate programs in Instructional Technology (IT).

CADAM Inc. Us-ming programs not described in the preceding pagesare the following: advanced numerical control programing, 3 -D surface.3-D piping, finite element modeling._and analysis_procedures, manage-ment overview basic 11 terminaLope_rations, job planning/on-the-jobtraining. basic numerical control programing, and instructor training.

442

430 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

Prerequisites/Occupations Served. =The singleprerequisite for the course is the ability to readblueprints. Most students who have attended thecourse have been_ drafters, designers, engineers,NC part programers, and managers of depart-ments in which the system is installed. Originallyused by induStrial designers, the CADAM systemis now also used by architecturatdesigners,ties planners engaged in floor and shelf layouts formarketS, hospital supply houses and other firms,and by electricians and electrical designers whouse the software for the design of printed circuitboards_ and wiring diagrams. Occupational catego-ries of students enrolling in CADAM's basiccourse are thus becoming more diverse as the ap,plications of the system multiply, and there areplans to adjuSt the basic course to reflect thechanging audience.

Curriculum. The _ course consists of eightlessons, each of which builds the students' abilityto operate the CADAM system by 4ntroducingthem to the use of one or more of the system'sfunction keys. By use of the function keys, theoperator calls up programs that enable him tocreate basic geometric shapes; to "edit" the geom:etry of his drawing the "relimit" function key,for example, is used to trim or extend geometricelements -=to indicate dimensions and to add nota-tions, and to perform a variety of other operations.By the end of the course, the students will havelearned the use of all of the function keys requiredkir basic engineering drawings and will, in theprocess; have completed a series of practical exer-cises that result in a completed design of an indus-trial robot arm.

Lesson one begins with a general introduction,including a brief history of the CADAM system;its benefits, and the needs ti,.at it can fill; an in-troduction to the workstation (including a hard-ware demonstration); and an overview of the gen-eral operation of the system. Following the intro-ductory lecture/demonstration, the students corn=plete an audio-tape-guided introductory lesson onthe graphics teminal, in which they learn how toenter and exit the system ("logon" and "lOgoff").--arid-to perform a few simple operations._ Theylearn; for example, to perform the basic filema:nipulation required to start a new drawing, call anexisting drawing to the screen, and file a diidWingon the computer disk.

From lesson two onward, the studentS spend ap-proximately 70 percent of their time working onthe terminals and learning the system by meansof practical exercises. In lesson two, they learn

how to use the circle, line, and point function keysto create points, lines, and circles at specific loca-tions; to use the offset key to create a line in a de-Sired direction, for example, or to create a new bon=

centric circle; and to perform procedUres for mov-ing, sizing, Setting;-and presetting the display onthe screen by use of the "window" function key,which can focus in on a small section Of a drawingox can widen its focus to preSent a full drawing onthe screen (like a camera taking either closeups ordistance shots);

In subsequent lessons, the students learn to editthe baSic geometry they have created (to createcorners, to trim or extend elements, and to changethe representation of an element froM one line-tyTeto another); to capture one or more elements formanipulation_ s a single entity or group, to ana-lyze existing elements (e.g., lengths of lineS, radiiof circles, and relative distance between a pair ofelementS); to create textual notes and symbols toaccompany the drawing on the screen; to createauxiliary views; to plot hard copies of the draw-ing; and to perform other basic functions;

In the final lesson; the students also learn jobplanning techniques and how to create and use astandard library of drawings.*

Instructional Methods.** The basic course is ari=

proximately 10 percent lecture (if delivered by aninstructor); 20 percent in-class reading, and 70 per-cent practical experience on the terminal;

When used as a self-study course, the studentworkbook provides course content informationand guides the student to consult the proceduresguide which comes with the training package tohelp him/her complete exercises on the computerterminal. CADAM also provides instructions tomanagers to help them monitor the instructionand strongly recommends that, even when thecourse is delivered in the self=study mode, an ex-perienced CADAM system user be on hand to an-swer questions and provide other assistance.

When used in a group learning environment, theworkbook provides structure and support for thelearning process, but the trainer becomes the Fri-mary resource by lecturing on course material, giv-ing guidance to the students, and pacing thecourse to the studente'speed.

Tire three critical elements in the instructionalmethodstressed by the trainers and in the work-

*A standard library is a collection of drawings of standard parts ormodels used frequently by a specific firm._Once the original drawingsare completed by the firm's designers, they are stored in the CADAMlibrary file and can be called up and used (as is, or modifieCO.

**This section is adapted from the CADAM Manager's Guide.

443

Appendix ASelected Case Studies: Summaries 431

book itselfare reading, planning, and careful per-formance of the exercises. The instructors encour-age the students to read for conceptual under-standing and to underline especially important sec-tions. Planning is also an integral part of the in-structional methodology: Each exercise is accom-panied by_a planning sheet for the students tocomplete. Once they read about the skills requiredto perform specific operations, they reinforce theirunderstanding by planning how they will utilizethose skills to complete the practical exercise.They then develop the skills by performing the ex-ercise specified in the workbook:

Since each lesson is constructed of interlockingstepseach of which presents new informationand introduces new skills while reinforcing skillsand information learned in previous stepsstu-dents are strongly encouraged not to skip over anyof the reading or planning phases.*

Training Materials: Each student_receives aworkbook; a Training Handbook and ProceduresGuide, a magnetic tape which is fed into the com-puter and contains student exercises; and audiotapes for the audio-guided segment in lesson one.In addition to the student material, the customerfirm also receives a manager's guide.- Evaluation of Students. Each lesson ofCADAM basic contains a selfevaluation quiz tohelp students gage their own progress in thecourse: Successful completion of the training doesnot depend on passing a final examination, but em-ployers sometimes request the trainers to providethem with informal evaluations of the students tohelp them determine which should be given chiefresponsibility for operating the system at thecustomer's site.

Student Evaluation of the Course.,-Studentsare asked to complete written evaluations of thecourse, the instructor, and the training materials.On a seven-point scale; students rate the courseobjectives, handouts, visual aids, homework,course content, applicability to their own needs,and the instructor. They also provide commentson the usefulness of the material, and their ownease or difficulty in absorbing it, and suggestionsfor improvement. After the interim revision of thecourse, ratings improved by up to two points,jumping from five or below to over six on the sev-en-point scale.**

*Sergi p. 23 for customer response to the "reading- planning- perform-ance" methodology.

"Since the : at revision of the course was released shortly beforethe writing of this study. information on student evaluations of the finalversion of the course was not available.

Follow-up.At the present time, follow-up ofprogram graduates is informal.* CADAM main-tains a hot line which can be used by customerswho experience software difficulties or run intooperation problems they cannot solve, and a num-ber of_ customers call the trainers directly for helpwith difficult problems.

ResultsNumber Trained.From January through Sep-

tember 1982, CADAM instructors trained over700 customer employees. That number, however,represents a small portion of trained CADAM sys-tem users, according to CADAM's training direc-tor. Because of the significant investment of timeand money involved in sending employees to theCADAM training facility or bringing a CADAMtrainer to the customer site, most users send an"advance guard" who receive the training and re-turn to train other employees:

Productivity Results.While it is difficult to ob-tain quantifiable data on the results of the train-ing as discrete from the results of system use; thesubjective evaluations of CADAM customers andthe improvement in the student ratings of the ba-sic course on CADAM's own seven-point ratingscale indicate that; for the most part,-CADAM '-system training effectively supports the product.Nevertheless, a few customers have experiencedsome problems with the training.

Problems/Solutions.Organizational Difficulties: Personnel and In-

structionalMairials.-7-The most significant prob-lem faced by the CADAM training division wasthat of organizing the training staff and the train-ing material to lower the cost and increase the con-sistency of the training itself. Creation of the pro-gram design department freed the trainers fromthe responsibility of developing their own train-ing material. The self-instructional training pack-age developed for the basic course also freesCADAM from some of the service costs (providingan instructor to teach the course, etc.) and offerscustomers the option of purchasing training forslightly more than half the cost of the instructor-delivered course. While not all CADAM coursesare amenable to the self-study format, the. train-ing division plans Co package the basic II terminaloperations; analysis procedures; and 3-D pipingcourses as self-study progranis.

Solution to the problem of organizing the staffand-materials; while decreasing the cost; created

The training director intends to formalize the follow-up proceduresonce all of the customer courses have been revised.

444

432 Computerized Manufactuting automation: Employment; Education, and the Workplace

another problem. Some of the instructors had dif-ficulty accepting the change in focus in the revisedbasic coursefrom the individual instructor'sterpretation and explanation to the-highly struc-tured and print-centered instructional material.These instructors point out that the new courseallows for less interaction between atudenta andinstructors. Other instructors, who have taughtthe basic course so frequently that they felt them-selves growing stale, believe that the new baeiccourse allows them to aid the students _progresswith more ease than in the past, and these trainersappreciate the opportunity to apply their effort§to the more advanced courses.

The solution to this problem of mixed instruc-tor response to the new training method is beingachieved through a give-and-take process of grad-ual accommodation. The instructors are required

to learn new techniques and methods which focuson facilitating the students' understanding of theprint-centered material rather than on the instruc-tors' own expertise and experience with the sys-tem. However, the division management pointsout that the instructors will be able to become ex-perts in teaching specific_ aspects or applicationsof the system in advanced courses which will con-tinue to require a large degree of teacher:Studentinteraction. While the students lose some degreeof personal interaction, they receive instructionalmaterials which thoroughly cover each step of theprocess in a consistent manner and which can beused as readily accessible review material after thetraining ia,completed.

Trainee-Centered Problems.--:A§ with othertraining programs in computer-aided manufactur-ing and design, aproximately 5 percent of traineesin the CADAM basic course exhibit resistance toit. CADAM training division representatives saythe root cause of this is "computer anxiety," a syn-drcime-with-two-tnaj or-aspects: -the- trainees ' fearthat they will be replaced by a cOmputer and thecorresponding fear that they will not be able tomaster the "monster" that is replacing them.

In some instances, "computer anxiety" ie ac-companied by another negative response, labelledby CADAM trainers as the "It'll All Go By" syn-drome (the belief that computer-aided &Sign is aflash-in-the-pan trend which will never createsignificant changes in design work); Trainees whodo show this type of resistance_ are in the mineri:ty and are; according to CADAM trainers, usual-ly designers, engineer* or drafters nearing retire-ment age. While the growth of CAD/CAM has re=duced the numbers of trainees who believe that"it'll all go by," "computer anxiety" remains a

signifiCent problem for some trainees: CADAMtrainers address this problem by explaining thatthe system iaa new tool that can only make theirjobs easier. The student workbook for the basiccourse also helps the trainees to overcome theiranxiety by, again; referring to the system as a toolrather than as a threat and introducing the stu-dents to the terminals within the first 8 hours ofinstruction by moving them into a hands-on exer-cise that is easy to execute and has minimal poten-tial for failure.

CADAM trainers estimate that fewer than one-quarter of the initially resistant trainees (2 percentof the total student group) retain their resistanceafter the firat two 2 days; they report that manysuch students have returned to take advancedcourses: Approximately 1 percent of all traineesfail to learn the aystem, not because of resistanceto the training, but because of a "mental block,"or inability to understand what is required to oper-ate the system.

Another problemone experienced by the ma-jority of traineesis that the basic course presentssuch a large volume of information that most stu-dents do, not grasp all of it during the week-longcourse. Ektension of the course into a second weekwas rejected as a solution because the customerfirms can rarely spare their employees for thatlength of time. The new instructional niaterials aredesigned to address the problem of "overload" bypresenting the information in the building blockpattern with built-in redundancies to reinforceknowledge of the previous steps. In additfon, thenew course material works as a reference guideonce the training has been completed;

Evaluation of Present and FutureCapacity to Meet Training Needs

Merrill -Lynch states: "As users become more aO-phisticatedi_ we envision a move toward generalpurpose mainframe computers at the high end

level for maximum performance and:Min.',ty to dodata base managenient .... This trend im-plies achange in character of some vendors towardbeing CAD/CAM system integratora"3 CADAIVV§orientation to the systems integration approach,and CADAM managenient'a belief that trainingis -an integral element in that approach, maybe the

-r.-_,CAD/CAM Review and Outlook, 1981, p. 2. The Merrill Lynch 1982

CAD/CAM Review and Outtooka user survey, however, found thatamong the overall disadvantages of mainframe systems are insufficientsoftware and support;-high initial expenses, and the fact that the en-tire system goes down when the CPU does.

44a

Appendix ASelected Case Studies: Summaries 433

key to the future potential of both the softwareproduct and the training that supports it. How-ever, it should'be noted that under its installeduser program IBM also markets CAD softwareproduced by other firms.

Two of those software packagesCAEDS, de-veloped by Structural Dynamics Research Corp.,and circuit board design system; developed by aCanadian firmaddress specific CAD applicationsand not the broad design and manufacturing mar-ket aimed at by CADAM; but the third packageCATIA, developed by Dassault Systems inFrancedoes, according to an IBM representa-tive; have some potential "overlap" with CADAMInc.'s software applications. In addition, IBM alsomarkets a CADAM training package, called a"Graphics Training Aid," developed by Westing-houses Industry Motor Division in Roundtree,TeX. The Graphics Training Aid was purchased byapproximately 50 companies in 1982, primarilythose intending to set up their own internalCADAM training operations.

While neither Westinghouse nor IBM views theWestinghouse Training Aid, which most buyerspurchase as a self-study package; as being in directcompetition with CADAM system training, theWestinghouse package does give the customer theoption of purchasing training other than that sup-plied by CADAM. Furthermore, CADAM train-ing is also sold by independent engineering andc3 ;- ..tilting firmsone of which, according to onec-.istomer interviewed, deliverecL2 weeks of "excel7lent" training to his employees. The "partnership"with IBM, then, does not give CADAM a monopo-ly on IBM's hardware customersnor does thefirm's own training department have a monopolyon CADAM training.

Customer Evaluations;Six CADAM Inc; cus-tomers, most of whom had received training aftereither the interim or final revisions of CADAM ba-sic had been completed, were interviewed; Mostof them represented medium- to large-sized firmswhich had previous experience with either theCADAM system or other computer-aided designsystems; and some are actively engaged in net-working CAD and CAM capabilities. Responsesto a request for an overall evaluation of the train-ingincluding content; delivery; and applicabili-ty to specific company needsranged from "rea-sonable" and "good" to "excellent." One custom-er, who had received CADAM training in Janu-ary 19821 went to an outside consultant for fur-ther CADAM training a few months later and re-turned to CADAM at the end of 1982 for more

training; said that training and other support sup-plied by CADAM was inadequate in January buthad shown "great improvement" and "greatly in-creased attention to detail" by the end of the year;

Benefits.One customerwho had made a3-year study of the CAD market before purchas-ing a systemsaid that the real benefit of thetraining deliveredby the CADAM training department, as opposed to CADAM training deliveredby other vendors, is that the trainees learn howto make the most efficient use of_ the system in theshortest period of time. Most of the customers saidthat, after completing formal CADAM systemtraining programs, they felt well prepared to em-bark on the most significant portion of the trainingthe period directly following the formalcourse when the systems are used for actualpro-duction work. During this 2- to 4-week period;most of those interviewed reported that their newCADAM system operators got "up to speed" (i.e.,produced designs at rates which matched or ex-ceeded manual drawing times) even faster than an-ticipated. Those who had purchased or were con-sidering purchasing the self-study packages feltthat this new option was a tremendous benefit, pri-marily because of the perceived need for ongoinginternal CAD training.

Problems;Aside from the problems mentionedin the preceding pages of this section, the most fre-___quently articulated problem was that the termi-nals at the CADAM Inc. training center occasion-ally -went "down" or had poor response7time. (Noneof the customers interviewed have had equipmentproblems at their own installations, hoWever, andmany reported "incredibly quick" response timesaveraging 0.15 second.) While the equipment prob=lems at CADAMwhich are currently being ad-dresseddo not reflect on the trainers or on thetraining materials, they did create an atmosphereof frustration which colored the trainees' percep-tion of the training course. One customer; whosefirm is locatedin the Southeast, has had numerousproblems with the CADAM hotline, which, heclaims, is often inaccessible to Eastern customersbecause it only operates during business hours onPacific time. This customer has lodged a formalrequest to encourage CADAM to extend its hot-line hours to accommodate customers located inother time zones.

All of those interviewed agreed that CADAMtraining is extremely expensive relative to custom-er training provided by ;the_ majority of othercomputer-aided-design firms. While most acceptedthe high cost of the training as either a necessary

446

434 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

evil or as the price of learning to be 6ffective usersof the CADAM system, one customer labelled thePrice of the training as "outrageoushighway rob-bery." Although most of those interviewedthought that the cost of the §elf;§tudy packages($650 per kit, as opposed to $1,250 per student forthe Basic course) makes CADAM training a morereasonable investment; one believed that even theself-study package was "twice what it should be."

Training for Profit: Pros and Cous;CADAM'straining director points out that while many hard-ware (and hardware/software) firms provide train:ing free of charge to their customersor at ratesfar below those charged by CADAM by; in es-sence, folding the cost of training into the hard-ware or software prices, CADAM's procedure ofpricing training to cover the operating and devel-opment costs of the training division creates cer-tain benefits for both the customer and the train-ing deliverer.

For one, customers get what they pay for=i.e.,customers who require little or ne training are notsubsidizing the training of other cnstorners, Sec-ondly, he says, because training costs are frequent-ly buried in equipment or operating costs, mostcompanies do not recognize that good training isexpensive to develop and deliver: It is for this rea-son, he believes; that training is often "too littleand too late" and is often among the first supportfunctions to be cut back during economic down -turns; so that; along with recognizing that train-ing is a necessity if sophisticated equipment is tobe used effectively, company management mustalso recognize the actual costs of creating andmaintaining training functions.

The status of training within CADAM's orga-nizational Structurethe fact that the trainingfunction is the sole responsibility of one Of the fourmajor divisionsindicate§ CADAM manage-ment's recognition that training itself is of pivotalimportance in the CAD/CAM field. The Scope anddegree of CADAM's commitment to training ispossibly unique in some respects. Certainly the rel-ative size of the training division (8 percent of thefirm's employees) is unusual,* as is the fatt thatthe training director reports directly to the presi-dent of the firm.

Also unusual is the degree of flekibility and re-sponsibility accorded co the training division. Thedivision is responsible for providing "quality"training to support the software product and for--------

1t should be noted. he wever. that the trail-dog division per-sonnel to other CADAM employees would be more difficult toachieve

in a larger firm.

making a profit. Also, it is given the flekibility, theresources, and the communicative channel withthe product development department necessary tofulfill that responsibility. A comment by a train-ing division representative provide§ a cbgent de-scription of the firm's approach to training in gen-eral: "We're trying to turn the old situation oftraining departments around._ Moat training de-partments are not given enough responsibility andaccountability and have a subservient position inthe companyi reporting through many level§ of bu-reaucracy._ In a high tech field, training ean_nolonger be handled in a subsidiary, low-level, low-priority feithionit's too important. Things are toovolatile and they change too faat."

By designating the training division as a profit-center and by providing it with the resources andorganizational support to produce a well=de§ignedtraining product, CADAM management has madean investment in the training itself: This meansthat the training product must be high-quality ifthe firm is to realize a return on its investment in-directly (in terms of product- support) and in termsof direct profit from the training charges. Profitrealized from the training is used to pay the train-ing division's operating costs_ and to fund develop-ment of new training programs and refinement ofalready-existing courses.

Asa profitmaking entity whose trainingproductentails a great deal of expenseboth to the cus-tomer and to CADAMthe training division runsthe risk of as one customer put it pricing itselfout of the training market. And when high pricesare combined with a reluctance on the trainers'part to go beyond the contents of the basic coursewhen students ask about advanced applications;the CADAM training division also runs the riskof giving some customers the impression that theirspecific needs will be attended to only insofar asthey do not extend into areas covered by furthertraining, i.e.; which entail further purchases oftraining.

On the other hand, statements by trainerssome user firms support the assertion ofCADAM's training director that the commonpractice of burying training costs in operating orother expenses keeps management unowera of thereal costs of providing training It is Po§aible thatwhat is perceived as an "outragebua" training costactually reflects a reality that most industries arenot used to seeing The training division'§ togni;zance of the need to lower training_costs whilemaintaining quality resulted in development of theself-study packages that both reduce cost and en=

44/

Appendix ASelected Case Studies: Summaries 435 .

able customers to train future generations of userswith the same instructional material. It remainsto be seen whether the self-study package willsolve the problem of high cost;

_

The firm's capacity to meet the direet trainingneeds of future CADAM customers will depend onits ability to maintain its gains in improving thequality of the courses and to develop new courseswhile keeping its prices within reasonable limits.CADAM's,approach to training presents an inter-esting conundrum: On one hand; CADAMtrates that significant time and money spent tomake training a "firat priority" can be seen as in-vestments rather than as begrudged expenses. Thefirm also illustrates that OP investment of theSeresources in well-designed and adequately testedtraining can increas-s productivity and profit: Onthe other hand; it may be a matter of questionableprudence for CADAM to be among the feW Soft-ware providers pricing their training "realistical-ly." Can they "educate" the entire population of

users as to the actual costs of training, or will othertraining vendors who offer "CADAM" instructionat a lower price deprive the training division of sig-nificant numbers of students?

Although CADAM training appears to be of ahigh standard, it also appears to some customersthat CADAM'S packaging of training as a high-priced commodity sometimes impinges on its over-all effectiveness by limiting the information avail=able to trainees in the basic classes. It would seemthen, that there is an attitudinal problem on thepart of both the recipients and the provider oftraining. each with his own expectations of theproper form of training and the behavior of train-ers. More explicit communication between thetrainerswho must use the limited time at theirdisposal to present a great deal of material in a sys-tematic fashionand the customerswho havevarying needs which may not always mesh withthe highly structured basic coursewould amelio-

-rate-this difficulty.

436 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

Case Study 4Programmable Controller Training Program

International Brotherhood of ElectricalWorkers, Local 11 Log Angeles County

Chapter, National ElectricalContractors Association

SummaryThe LOS Angeles Electrical Training Trust is the

training arm of the Joint Apprenticeship TrainingCommittee of the International Brotherhood ofElectrical WorkerS (IBEW) Inside Cor'tstructionLocal 11 and the Los Angeles Chapter of the_Na-tional Electrical Contractors' Association (NEC A.).The Training Trust, supported by Lbtal 11 mem-bers and the electrical contractors who employthem, provides a 4-year apprenticeship trainingprogram and voluntary courses for Local 11neymen.

In the late 1970's, the Trust began addressingthe need to provide journeyman training in theskills required to install, troubleshoot and main-tain the electronic devices that were beginning toreplace a number of the hard-wired electrical de-vices involved in inside:ConStrirctibn in factories,plants, and offiteS. This study focuses on one setof course offerings provided by the Trusta se-ries of three courses on the installation, program-ing, and troubleshooting of programmable con-trollers.

Background: LOS Angeles EleetricalTraining ,Tinst

The Los Angeles Electrical Training Trust(ETT) was established in 1964 to support educe=tional and training programs for apprentices andjourneymen covered under the collective bargain-ing agreement between IBEW Local 11 (InsideConstruction) and the Los Angeles Chapter of theNational Electrical Contractors' Association(NECA).* As provided for in the Labor Manage-----

1,6Ciil 11 4s one of 365 IBEW inside construction locals, whose mem-berShiji work primarily for independent electrical contractors. TheI BF,W also maintains manufacturing locals._serving electricallelectronicmanufacturing firms; maintenance locals. whose members do in-_plantmaintenance; utility locals serving public power companies: and tele-phone iflea§: Because members of Inside Construction Locals oftenwork for toinedium-sized contracting firms which donot have the resources to provide inplant skills training. the Inside Con-

ment Relations Act of 1947, the Trust is jointlyoperated by local union and management repre-sentatives and is supported by regular contribu-tions from Local II members and their employers.Under the terms of the current collective bargain-ing agreement, Local 11 members contribute 50for every hour worked into the Trust, while theiremployers contribute 15e for every employee-hour.While the primary responsibility of the Trust isto provide apprenticeship training, the Los Ange-les ETTalong with a number of the other localIBEW training organizations in the UnitedStatesalso operates an active journeyman skillsimprovement program.

All apprentice and journeyman courses are heldin training facilities that are either owned, leased,or rented by the Trust. To accommodate the ap-proximately 7,000 journeymen_ and 650 appren-tices in the Local's Los Angeles County jurisdic-tion (covering 4,069 square miles) the Trustmaintains five training centers: one "Metro Facil-ity" in downtown Los Angeles, and one ixreach ofthe district's four other dispatch areas. The MetroFacility; opened in March 1981, contains sevenclassrooms and 8,000 square feet of laboratoryarea (including a $300,000 process_ instrumentationlab, as well as laboratories for welding, house wir-ing, conduit bending, motor controls, transform-era, fiber optics, high-voltage cable splicing, airconditioning; and fire alarms and life safety in-struction). Two of the dispatch area training fa-cilities have permanent laboratories; while theother two occupy rented space which is convertedinto temporary laboratories for training pur-poSeS.*

Training Trust Administration and Staff. Inaccordance with the provisions of the Labor Mari-

struction Locals are among the most active in delivering journeymantraining under the auspices of Joint Apprenticeship Training Com-mittees.

The National Electrical Contractors Association maintains 135 localchapters throughout the United State.: The Los Angeles Chapter Currenay has 230 member contracting firms, 35 of which have 30 or morepermanent employees and often provide design and engineering as wellas installation services. The remainder of the members employ an aver-age of 10 to 12 full-time workers. NECA memberaprovide electriCal con-tracting services to a wide variety of customers, including manufactur-ing firms. powerplants, newspapers, hospitals, schoolsand_offices.number of NECA members are else members of the IBEW.

By the end of 1983, the Trust hoped to have established permanenttraining facilities in all of the dispatch areas.

Appendix ASelected Case Studies: Summaries 437

agement Relations Act, the Trust Fund is con-trolled and administered by a six-member Boardof Trustees with equal union- management repre-Sentatiiin. In addition to the Board of Trustees,the Los Angeles ETT is also served by five JointApprenticeship Subcommittees (JASC7-one ineach of the diStrict's five dispatch areas) and theJoint Journeyman Educational Advisory Commit-tee (JJEAC); On the permanent staff of the Train-ing Trtist are the director, a staff representativein charge of apprenticeship training, a staff rep-resentative for journeyman training; and a seniorinstructor: The majority of the courses are taughtby journeyman electricians who serve as part-timeinstructors for the Trust.

The Trust director is appointed by the trusteesand is responsible for the ongoing operation of thetraining programs. The current director, appointedin 1978, has had previous experience as both anMEW journeyman and an electrical contractor.Both Staff representatives have worked as IBEWjourneymen and foremen; and both have had pre-vious experience working with training and educa-tional programs. All of the approximately 25 part-time instructors who teach the apprenticeship pro-grams are credentialed aspart -time instructors bythe State of California. The 58 instructors whoteach journeyman courses are not required to ob-tain State teaching licenses; approximately half ofthem; however, are credentialed.

PhileSoPhY of 'Training: General Goals. Themajor goal of the Electrical Training Trust is todeliver comprehensive apprenticeship training andprovide journeymen with the opportunity to im:prove or reinforce existing skills and develop newskills required by the changingelectrical/electron-ics field. According to the ETT's director of jour-neyman training, the line between electricity andelectronics is beginning to dissolve; electricians in-tent on keeping their skills current, therefore, mustdevelop new skills in electronics and computer-aided equipment.

Because of the voluntary nature of journeymantraining, the Trust's educational philosophy alsostresses motivation- and creating an awareness ofnew skill needs to encourage journeymen_to takeadvantage of the training courses offered. Individ-ual motivation and Self-initiative are especially sig-nificant, since approximately 25 percent of themembership is hired for relatively short installa-Lien jobs out of the union hiring hall. Of the re-mainder,:approximately 60 percent are permanent-ly employed and 40 percent work for two to threecontractors per year.

Another aspect of the Trust's training philoso-phy is that it is the right of each journeyman whoworks at least 6 months per year to take anycourse offered in the skill-improvement programif he or she has completed the prerequisite courses.To avoid discouraging voluntarparticipation inthe program, no grades are assigned at the end ofthe courses, and (for the majority of courses) noselection criteria are applied. The introduction ofcoursework on computer-based equipment like pro-grammable controllers and process-instrumenta-tion devices has; however; created exceptions tothe general free-enrollment procedure. Because notall of the students who enrolled in the intermediateprogrammable controller courses had a solid graspof the fundamentals taught in the basic course, se-lection procedures have now been instituted forthat course. The process instrumentation pro-grama lengthy series of courses totalling 795hoursrequires students to pass an evaluation asan admission requirement and to pass examina-tions before proceeding from one course to thenext.

Training Overview.The Los Angeles TrainingTrust delivers required courses for apprentices and"pending examination wirer/ion" and voluntarycourses for journeymen. Apprentices take a totalof 840 hours of work-related classroom instructionat the Trust; extending over a 4-year period (3hours per night/2 nights per week).* Related in-struction courses include electrical code, mathema-tics, blueprint reading; first aid; pipe bending,welding, instrumentation, basictranSistors, andelectronics. Applications for the apprenticeshipprogram are accepted every 2 years in Los Ange-les. During the most recent application period,1,650 candidates applied for the '100 to 200 appren-ticeship openings anticipated over the next 2years. New apprentices are admitted to the pro=gram on the basis of their rank score from the oralinterview.**

"Pending examination" (PE) wiremen are experi-enced electricians who have not gone through the

-------*The L. A. 'Trust's apprenticeship progriunls b_ased_on the4y.ear pro-

gram offered_by the_NationalJoint Apprenticeship and Training Com-mittee in Washington. D.C. While the International sets guidelines fortmprenticeship_ training, Locals have flexibility in setting their own pro-grams. The Inside Construction Local in Detroit, for example, requires672 hours of related instruction, delivered once every 2 weeks (8 hoursper day).

*Of the 1,650 recent applicants, 1.150 passed the qualifying exami:nation, which focuses on mathematics skills. Those who qualified on thebasis of the examination were then interviewed and were ranked from1 to 1.150 on the basis of the interview. As apprenticeship openingsoccur over the next 2 years, candidates will be called according to theirplacement on the list.

438 Computed-zed Mani: facturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

apprenticeship program but who instead becomemembers when their employer signs an agreementwith the Local. The PE prograrn originated in LosAngeles in 1980 and has now spread throughoutCalifornia and into some 6ther States as well.* PEwiremen receive journeyman_ wages but are re-quired to take an evaluation examination and toattend a concentrated 2-year, four-semester course

to reinforce their knowledge through formal_ ;-,Lily__and_to_upgrade their skills: At the end of

the program; they take the formal journeyman'sexamination to achieve full journeyman status.

Both the apprenticeship and the PE programsare administered through the Los_Angeles CountySchools' Regional Occupational Program, whichServeS zia regiStrtu. for the two Trust programs dis-cussed above.

Approximately 2,000 journeymen completedvoluntary skill=improvement courses in 1981-82.Journeyman courses range from 3-week reviews ofrecent changes in the national electrical code to 13-week courses in advanced blueprint reading to a3 1/2:year series of courses on process instrumen-tation.**_The journeyman skill-improvement pro,gram is focused on reinforcing core trade skills andintroduCing new skills in demand in the local mar-ketplace. Among those new skills are those re-quired to install, program; troubleshoot program-mable controllers, process instrumentation skills,and test arid-splice fiber optics cable.

Programmable Controller (PC) CoursesPlanning and Development. The _need for

coursework in programmable controllers was firstbrought to the attention of the Training Trust in1978 by members of the Joint Journeyman Educa-tional Advisory Committee (JJEAC) One of thecommittee membersa general construction man-ager for a large contracting firm that designs, en-gineers, and installs computerized systems for ma-terials handling and process controlplayed aninstrumental role by convincing the committee ofthe need, by providing advice on prerequisite

*In many areas of the country, experienced electricians who enter In-side Construction Locals when their shops are organized automaticallybecome full-fledged journeymen. Approximately 400 P. E. wiremen arenow taking courses at the L. A. Training Trust.

**Process instrumentation is the application of electric, electronic.and/or air controls to regulate pressures for measuring fluids or gasesand for indicating and controlling levels, temperatures and flow of liq-uids or gases. Students in the process instrumentation program aretaught how to inspect, calibrate install, tune, _and troubleshoot com-puter-aided instrumentation and process-control systems used in chem-ical and petrochemical plants, refineries, breweries. food processing. andother industries.

coursework and equipment, and by recommendingpotential instructors.

Following the advice of its "area expert," thecommittee recommended that the Trust first de-velop a motor controls course to aid in preparinginterested-journeymen to take the more advancedPC courses. Westinghouse's Standard Conti-el Di-vision in El Monte, Calif., proved to be extremelyhelpful in the development stage, both by-provid-ing equipment at a greatly reduced rate and by rec-ommending one of its applications specialists tobe the course instructor; The curriculum for thefirst programmable controller course was devel-oped by the Westinghouse spOcialiat, reviewed andmodified by JJEAC to increase its focus on thespecific needs of Local LI journeymen; and _ap-proved by the Board of Trustees late in 1980.

The first class was offered in October 1981, andthe course has now become a staple offering of theTrust's journeyman skill improvement program.In the fall of 1982, the WestinghouSe specialistwho developed and taught the basic course beganteaching an intermediate course, PC III, to grad-uates of the basic course. PC II, a hands-on coursecovering similarities and differences of four of themajor prbgranmiable controllers on the market;will be offered in the summer of 1983.

Goals and Objectives. Specific goals and objec-tives ofthoprograrnmable controller courses sup-port the major objective of the Training Trust'sjourneyman skill improvement program, which isto provide Local 11 members with the opportunityto develop knowledge and skills in all areas of elec-tricity/electronics applicable to employment oppor:tunities in the Los Angeles area covered by theTrust agreement. This entails not only meetingcurrent needs; but attempting to forecast futureneeds so that the Local will be able to provide atrained work force when opportunities occur%Courses that develop skills in high-teehnolOgyfields such as programmable controllers, proceSSinstrumentation, and fiber optics are consideredby the Trustees and the JJEAC to be crucial areasof education and training for journeymen whowant to keep pace with the skill requirements ofthe local marketplace. In the words of the Trust'sdirector of journeyman training, "The only thingswe have to sell are our Sicilia and knowledge thesemust be pertinent."

Since the Trust was established to serve bothunion members and the contractors who employthem, its goal in offering the programmable con-troller courses is twofold: to provide appropriateskill training to Local 11 members, and to meet

451

Appendix ASelected Case Studies: Summaries 439

the needs of signatory contractors, more and moreof whom are making installations irrolving pro-grammable controllers: The specific objectives ofthe series of PC courses offered by the Trust areto train journeymen to install, provide power to,program, and troubleshoot programmable control-lers. The goal_of PC I is to provide a basic introduc-tion to installation and programing requirementsso that a graduate of the course could, under thedirection of a skilled foreman; aid in PC installa-tions on the job. The goal of the intermediatecourse is to provide additional information andpractice in programing and to teach troubleshoot-ing techniques to enable members to do installa-tion work with less supervision.

With the addition of the PC III course, the PCseries will fulfill its overall objectiveto familial*ize advanced students with installation, program-ing, and troubleshooting techniques specific to themajor PC systems in use in the Los Angeles areain order to provide them with increased work op-portunities.

Administrative and Instructional Staff.TheTrust "staff representative" who directs the jour-neyman skill-improvement training is an activesupporter of "high-technology training" for jour-neymen. The journeyman training departmenttook major responsibility for locating the equip-ment and the instructor for the original PC courseand for ongoing coordination of what is now a se-ries of courses on programmable controllers.

Until the first few months of 1983, all of the pro-grammable controller courses were taught by asingle instructor; a Westinghouse applications spe-cialist employed by the sales and customer up-port group of the Standard Control Division'sNuma Logic Department. His prior technical ex-perience includes work as an IBEW journeymanelectricianthen as a draftsman, nuclear ppwer en-gineer, and control panel designer. Previous to hisemployment by the Training Trust as a PC in-striktor, he had taught a series of courses on pro-grammable controllers to employees of the LosAngeles Department of Water and Power. By thespring of 1983, four new instructorsLocal 11journeymen who have either taken previously of-fered PC courses at the Trust or have on-the-jobexperiencewill begin teaching the basic course.In addition, they have completed customercourses, paid for by the Trust and delivered byAllen Brndley; Modicon, and Westinghouseallmajor producers of programmable controllers inthe United States.

25-452 0 - 84 - 29 : QL 3

Equipment.The "Metro Facility" of the Train-ing Trust contains four classrooms and three class-roornflabs; one of which is available for PC courses;In addition, PC classes are also offered on a rotat-ing basis at training sites in four of the district'sdispatch areas: As of this writing; the Trust ownstwo Westinghouse 700 series Numa Logic Pro-grammable Controllers, which are transported bythe instructor from one training facility to anotheras the occasion demands.* The administrativestaff of the Trust is currently in the process of pur-chasing programmable controllers manufacturedby Allen Bradley; Modicon; and Texas Instru-ments in preparation fort he_F'C III course to beoffered in the summer of 1983.

Costs and Funding.The journeyman skill-im-provement courses are supported entirely byTraining Trust funds. Most cost items for the pro-grammable controller courses were not available(administration; instructor salaries; student ma-terials, or classroom rental). The twomajor itemsof equipment currently in usethe Westinghouseprogrammable controllers, valued at $25,000eachwere purchased by the Trust for a total of$10,000. In addition, the Trust has set aside fundsfor thepurchase of the other three PC systems tobe used in the advanced course.

Costs to Students.Tuition and instructionalmaterials are free of charge to eligible journeymenand apprentices (see Selection; below); However,to encourage students to complete the courses, a$10 deposit is charged at the beginning of everycourse and is refunded to those students with sat-isfactory attendance records.

Selection Procedures and Enrollment Trends.SelectionJourneyman skill-improvement

courses are open to all members of Local II whohave worked 6 or more months out of the preced-ing year for signatory unions.** Apprentices arediscouraged from doing so until they have learnedthe fundamentals of the trade. To date, no appren-tices have completed the basic course.

Until recently, no enrollment control existed foreither the basic or intermediate PC courses; asidefrom the necessity of completing the basic course

*Though the Metro Facility provides secure storage space for equip-ment, the other training sites do not. Furthermore, classes have, in thepast, been offered concurrently at more than one facility. The compact,transportable equipment therefore gives the Trust the flexibility to of-fer classes at more than one site.

*Since the Training Trust is supported a small proportion of thefringe benefits attached to the wages of working members of the Localand by contractors who are signatories to the trust agreement,

4 5 '2

440 Computenzed Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the VVOrxprace

(PC I) before signing up for PC II.* Since, hi:4=ever, regular attendance is the only formal gradua-tion requirement, some gradtates of the basiccourse have signed up for the intermediate coursewithout the prerequisite skills and knowledge tobenefit from the more advanced instruction. InFebruary 1983, a new polies, was establishedwhereby members who enroll in PC I take an en-trance examination covering motor control theory.Those who do not pass the exam -are encouragedto take the motor controls course offered by theTrust Were continuing with the bk:,.sic PC course.Admission to PC II is now at the diStretion of theinstructor; who will base his decision on a reviewof completed homework exercises required in PCI.** When the advanced course, PC III, isdelivered in the_sununer of 1983, only those whosehomework_in PC II exhibits a .thorough under-standing of the intermediate course will be accept -

ea. Those who are not accepted into PC II and PCIII will be encouraged, to retake the precedingcourse to bring their skills up to the required leVel.

Enrollrrient TrendstAttritioiL=Accotdiiit to theWestinghouse instructor, the PC I_and I1 ciurseshave been very well. attended, sometimes drawingas many as 32_enrollees for a single course. Thecomplexity of the coursework, however, and theneed of some of the PC I enrollees for backgroundcoursowiii-k in motor controls and solid-state die&tiorticS, has resulted in an overall attrition rate ofapproximately 33 percent.*** While the preferredclass Eize is 12, classes have ranged in size from8 to :13 students. (Especially Ian :e easseS are splitin VS/4, which, until the r : ..t addition of the twoextra instructors, presenteti problems for theWestinghouse train(. , who had to teach claSSOStWii' week to accommodate all interested stu-den i3oth enrollment and attrition are less inPCA tban 'n PC I.

Tli erni.;;i merit situation of the journeymanelectricians enroll in the PC courses variesconsiderably. ..ome are permanently err 7:loyed by

e nip loyeei Covered_ under the_ I W Local tl egreemenc wfyo-haveworked at ledat half the work-days of the year previous to- ir^liin -g in

crasses have contributed to thc crust bind and arcs C.:tete:4:7e

OccaSionally, members who have worked less than the normally re=.ited6 months are allowed to aLtene chissep. These dechiicini

ca.,:-by-case'Siiiderita with previous experience working with pragraindiable_coo-

tioilekb on the job muy also tees -in to the intermediate doiliSe without.

having completed PC__1,____**Soccessful completion of homework assignments is not a require-

ment for gra,2: _ation, only for entrance to the next course."In rer,gnitionof the potential for attrition, din instructothan :n-

etituted the following acLiCe. An entrance eat concentrating on motorcontrols theory is given on the first night, and those interested in par.ticitlating were Chet._ intervieee and were ranked from 4150 on

the be. it, of _the .nterview. As i-oprentideattip openings occur over tnerenet_?_years, candidates will l;,. according to their jacernentat, list.

signatory contractors;* some work_for single con-tractors for long stretches of time (6 to 12 months)on major installation jobs; others work "out of thehall," i.e., are not permanently or semipermanentlyemployed but rather are hired for relatively shortjobs out of the union hiring hall; Because of thecurrent economic situation in Los Angeles, a grow-ing number of the students in PC courses work outof the hall.

Two additional factors play a part in this enroll-ment trend: 1) large electrical contractors who pro-vide design and engineering services as well as in-stallation often provide in =house training for theirLocal 11 emplOyees who install programmable con-trollers, and it is these contractors who do mostof the PC installation in the county, and 2) a num-ber of smaller contractors who are prepared to doinstallations _involving programmable control-lersand who would be likely to encourage theiremployees to take the PC or to hire coursegraduates------have been affec y the constructionslump.

Curricula: PC IPC I and PC II wereboth designed to be 18-hour courses; delivered in 3-hour segments 1 evening a week for 6 weeks. How-ever, because of the amount of material to be cov-ered in the basic course, recent PC I courseshavebeen extended to 7 weeks; PC III, currently in thedevelopment stage; will be froth 16 to 24 hours inlength and will take place on the weekends to en-able students to attend intensive 8-hour-a-dayclasses.

PC L-- Students in this introductory courselearn terminology, the basics of the theoriesbehindprograrornable controllers; how to ad-dress the cqu.pment, NJ* it works, and basic

program cling, and applications.Since :no majority 14 :.;tt:den te enter the classwith limited experie,mt-- siiii&State controls,the first two sef;sionc; are devoted to basictheoryan introde,ttion to logic and to Bool-ean algebra (session I), an introduction to sol-id-state controls, aria a comparison betweensolid-_state L.nd electromechanical devices (ses-sion II).

Progrerrunah4. controllers are not intro-duced until hd third session, when studentsietzrn what programmable controllers are, howthey compare to electromechanical controls,and some basic PC applications. Installationand basic programing (including an overviewof input aid output devices and special func-tions involving timers, counters, and othertre-vices) are covered in session 11/ Session's V-

*Conductors who operAte:!union houses" and are signatory to thecollective bargaining agreement between Los Angeles NECA andIDE 417 LoCal i I .

VII are primarilJ devoted to discussion andpractice of programing for specific applica-tions. In addition; session VII also covers"multiplexing," i.e., carrying out multiplefunctions simultaneously in an independentbut related manner; an operation that ofteninvolves combining several signals so thatthey can be handled by a single device.PC II provides graduates of the PC I coursewith the opportunity to practice the basic pro,.graining techniques they learned in PC I andto learn more advanced programing applica-tions. For example; they learn to program thePCs to control a "bad parts detector" on amanufacturing plant conveyor system bywriting and inputting programs for countingthe total number_ of parts on the linecount-ing the number of faulty parts, and for reject-ing the parts that are flawed. In addition, thestudents complete a number of troubleshoot-ing exercises: the instructor puts "bugs" intothe classroom equipment and requires the stu-dents to tell him why the equipment is notworking, how they would fix it, and what theresult will be once the adjustment is made.

Both the programming and the troub16-shooting experiences are of use to inside wire-men who, when they install programmablecontrollers, often run a basic program for test-ing purposes and troubleshoot equipmentproblems that may occur. Some wiremen mayalso work for contractors who may be calledback to a facility to troubleshoot and repairequipment that they installed initially.PC I I I.This course, now under develop-ment, will teach graduates of PC II how to in-stall, program, and troubleshoot the majormodels of programmable controllers currentlyon the market. Accordingly, the course will fo-cus on teaching the students the differencesand similarities between the WestinghouseNuma Logic 700 Series used in PC I and PCII and the models produced by AllenBradley,Modicon, and Texas-Instruments: The Trustis currently proceeding with plans to purchasethe equipment; and the Westinghouse instruc-tor is designing the course materials. _ _

Instructional Materials and Teaching Meth-ods.Instructional materials for the PC I coursewere developed by the Westinghouse instructorspecifically for use in Training' Trust courses.Using some material from the WestinghouseNuma Logic programing and applications manualsand some original material, he devised an instruc-tional package specifically geared for skilledtradespeople with knowledge of electricity but not

Appendix ASelected Case Studies: Summaries 44

necessarily of electronics. The same approachbased on relating the principles, theories, and oper-ation of programmable controllers to the theoryand operation of electrical and electromechanicaldevicesis used in lectures and hands-on exer-cises: Whenfeaching Boolean algebra; for exam-ple, the instructor relates it to common electricalproblems the trainees .already understand, andspecific Boolean algebra problems given in classand for homework are based on actual wiring prob-lems the electricians would be likely to run into inthe f:eld.

Another example of this approach would be theinstructor's method of teaching the thetry andoperation of timers and counters, which are amongthe basic components of PC systems. He explainsthe use and purpose of timers and counters by re-lating them to relays and electromechanical de-vices; explains how programing takes the place ofwiring when dealing with programmable control-lers; and assigns in-class, hands-on exercises toreinforce the basic concepts.

The initial exercise is always reinforced by a sec-ond exercise which is very similar to the first.Homework, including reading and problem exer-cises; is assigned weekly to further reinforce thematerial taught in class and to lay the basis forthe next week's lecture and laboratory wok-k. Al=though no final grade is given, tests are conductedat the beginning and end of the course and are sup-plemented by weekly quizzesall of which help theinstructor to know what to emphasize for each in-dividual_ class:

Both PC Land PC II are approximately 70 per-cent lecture, 30 percent hands-on. In PC II, theprograming and troubleshooting exercises becomemore difficult as the course_ progresses, as the stu-dents are taught to reapply what they have al-ready learned to increasingly difficult problems.No specially designed training_manuad is used forPC II. Instead, students use Westinghouse pro-graming and applications manuals. Students in PCIII will have access to the programing and applica-tion documentation-for all of-the-systems-taught-r=and will learn to write basic programs and modify [)existing programs on these systems. III addition;they will learn to identify similar problems in allthe models, along with methods for troubleshOot-ing the various systems. Students in this advancedcourse will be expected to complete a great dealof reading on their own time to free up the majori-ty of the class time for practical installation, pro-graming; and troubleshooting exercises; -

To increase the amount of hands-on time avail-able to each student in the PC II classes,, a newsystem was inaugurated in the 1983 winter-spring

45.4

442 Computerized Manufacturing Autorriation: Employment; Education, and the Workplace

schedule. Each student in these classes had the op-portunity to take a programmable controller fora week of at-home practice. In addition, studentsin future classes will also have access to the newtraining equipment presently being purchased,which will be male available to them at the MetroFacility when it is not being used for trainingpurposes; -

Course and Student Evaluations=Evaluations of the CoursesStudentS complete-

written evaluations of the course, the instructor;the facilities; and the instructional material. Whilethere is no formal course evaluation by the trust-ees, the JJEAC; or the Training Trii§t Staff. boththe I BEWIL.ocal and the local NECA chapter pro-vide unofficial channels for evaluation of thecourse by both contractors and journeythen. Con-tractors who employ union thembers who havecompleted the class giVe NECA informal evalua-tions of the workers' skills; and this inforthationi§ transmitted to the Trust through the contractor -Members- of the Trustee, committee and theJJEAC. Similar informal evaluations reach theTruat via the union representatives who Sit on thevarious committees.

Evaluations of the Students:Since journey-than skill- improvement courses are taken on the-Students' own time and on a 'Veltintary basis, nocourse grades are given, and it is not necessary topass a final examination to graduate froth anyjourneyman course. However, the new selectioncriteria for admission to PC I and PC H will re-quire that students in the less-advanced coursesilluStrate the ability to proceed with more-ad-vanced coursework as an adinission requirementto PC II and III.

ReSiilt§ ti

As of February 1983, 8 Local 11 members hadioznpleted the basic coOrse and 29 had completed'-the intermediate course. Since the Trustjaas noformal follow-uP mechamism for tracking gradu-ates of the journeyman coursesril is diffieult toassess the overall results of the training in termsof job performance and/or expanded employmentopportunities:-Interviews with the Training Truatstaff, the PC instructor, students, and contractors

--have produced some data Which, though limited,illustrate some training results in specific in=stances.

Of nine journeymen interviewed in the January1983, PC II class, one was currently working ona PC installation, one had been hired from the hall

to work on PC installations in the past, andanother was preparing to beTOme one of the newPC instructors. All three were taking the courseto inc-ease their applications and troubleshootingskills, and one noted that the course was especiallyHelpful in teaching him to recognize troubleshoot-ing problems. The other six had not had the op=purtunity to work with programmable controllerson the job. !-.)tit were taking the course for two rea-sons: 1; (...preptire themselves for future opportu-nities, an4 2) because they believed it was incum-isent or them to develop the skill to work with thpek.tronic and computer-aided oquipment they:xocv see to be replacing electromechanical device§ui many operations

Those who worked out of the hall stated that thePC courses they had taken would give them a dis=tinct advantage in obtaining work, since theywould be able to respond to "specialty calls" (re-quests for workers with specific skills) for PC in-stallation when these come into the hiking hall.*

Six of the eight contractors interviewed pro-vided in-house PC training for their Local II em-ployees. ** One hOwever, said that he "expects"his employees to take the Training Trust PCcourses and that eight of his employees who hadtaken the course had improved their skills. Whileone large contractor who provided formal trainingclasses did not see the need for his employees totake the Trust classes, he did support the train-ing for other, smaller, contractors. Three otherSwho provided their own training' did not have apresent need for more employees skilled in PC in-stallation. They could anticipate; however; a future--need and thought that the course graduates-WOuldbe attractive hiring preSpects.-

One employee of another of the contractors hadtaken the class -bud; because the contractor had anadequate-number of ernPloyees who were experi,encid in PC installations, the course graduate hadnot yet had the opportunity_ to do any installa-tions. He would; though, be "first in line" for suchwork should the need arise. Another contractor;who hdd hired two course graduates, rioted thatthe PC and process instrumentation course,; pro-

' vided by the Trust save contractors time and mon-ey by enabling them to make installations with=

Although no formal refresher courses are provided for these Whiido not heVe the opportunity topractice thou- new skills on the jai-. Local

I i memberS tiidy maintain and increase their skills by taking the moreadvanced courser.. PC III is so designed that students can benefit fromrepeating it one or more times to get additional handekeri practice.

Training ranges from formal classes to on-the-job instruction.

Appendix ASelected Case Studies: Summaries 443

out first having their employees trained byequipment manufacturers' representatives.

In terms of direct results of the training, empioy-ers' and students' comments indicate that a rela-tively small proportion of the graduates (possiblya third) have had an opportunity to make use oftheir training on the job. Since, however, gradu-ates of the courses delivered as far back as 1981were not available for interviews; the actual num-ber of graduates currently using their skills may,in fact, be much larger.

For the remainder of the graduates; the primaryresult of the training has been to increase theiremployment potential and to offer thein the oppor-tunity to work with a higher level of technologywhich, according to all the journeymen _inter-viewed, is "more interesting and less dirty" thanthe "wire pulling" and pipe bending they often doon installation jobs; According to the Westing-house instructor, who is also engaged in sales andservice of PCs and other control system compo-nents, today's $370 million PC market representsa tremendous growth over the last 3 years. He pre-dictS that, by 1990, the market will have grownto at least $500 million and that one result of thatgrowth will be an ever - increasing need for proper-ly trained workers on the part of electrical contrac-tors who ii,.;tall (and often design and engineer)control-Systems for manufacturing facilities; proc-essing plants, newspapers, and numerous other en-terprises.

According to the chapter manager of the LosAngeles chapter of NECA, the training providedby the Trust gives small- and medium-sized con-tractors who do not have the resources to train in-house the opportunity to bid on installations in-corporating PCs and other sophisticated controls.Not only will the Trust classes train their perma-nent employees, but they also help to develop apool of trained workers in the hiring hall who canrespond to the PC specialty calls from contractors.This issuei.e., the future potential of the gradu-ates and the potential opportunities their newskills create for local contractorswill also be eval-uated in section III. The remainder of this sectionwill focus on problems directly affecting the train-ing courses, and the solutions to those problems.

Problems /Solutions.Because so many of thestudents do not have the opportunity to work withPCs on the job, it became increasingly clear to theinstructor that the amount of class time-availablefor hands-on experimentation and practice on theequipment was inadequate. Two new procedures,both instituted in the first few months of 1983,lessen the effects of this problem.

' c 84 i0 : 1, -1

The extension of the PC I course to seven ses-sions has Added 3 additional hours of hands-ontime upping the total class hours available for lab-oratory work from 6 to 9. While the extra classtime is helpful, students in a class of 12 (the aver-age size of Training Trust PC classes) still haveless than a few hours each on the equipment; Itis the second solution, therefore, which is the mostpromising: in the PC II classes tirat began m Jan-uary 1983, all 6 he students took one of the PCconsoles home for a week or more, This allowedthem to apply what they learned in PC I; and toexperiment with some of the programing ap_plica-tions they covered in the PC IL According to theinstructor, an "immense" improvement was seenboth in the weekly homework and in the final ex-amination once all of the students had amplehands-on opportunities.

Another new practice, soon to be instituted, willallow for even more hands-on opportunities. TheMetro Facility laboratories will be made availableduring the day and on those nights when PCclasses are not in session. This w-iI1 enable ad-vanced students in PC II and studerip. in PC IIIto practice on the Allen Bradley, Moilicon, andTexas Instruments programmable controllers,while PC I and less advanced PC II students cancontinue to use the Westinghouse systems at theirown homes. Since there is usually little or no over-lap in the scheduling of PC I and PC II courses,this system should provide amnle hands,on oppor,tunities for any student willing to avail himself ofthem.

A second problem, closely related to the first;is the lack of time in an 18- to 21-hour course tocover a great deal of complex material. Here,a- gain, the extra session recently added to PC I willbe of help; a's will the recent emphasis on encour-aging those who do poorly on the entrance exami-nation to first take the motor-controls course. Theinstructor also encourages beginning stiadents totake the Trust's process instrumentation course,which covers the fundamentals of solid-state elec-tronics and provides those students who take itwith basic skills and information applicable to thePC courses. The more information about motorcontrols and solid-state electronics entering PCstudents- have; the easier it become to movequickly through the introductory material in thefirst two sessions and spend more class time onPC progrEning, installation; and applications;

Another related problem is the widely varyingknowledge and skills of the students. The instruc-tor estimates that; in a class of 12; four or fiveusually exhibit a ready grasp of the material. An-

45 ti

444 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: EmployMent, Education; and the Workplace

other two or three demonstrate a le§S=than-com-plete understanding, while the remainder are un-able to make the transition between the principlesgoverning electricity ,ind those - governing electron-ics and do not gresr, t:ie different approach re-quired by progra.niry es opposed to hard wiring.On the other hand notes that many studentswho "don't get " tht- first time around shoW greatdeterminatit.., repeat the basic course one;two and even more times.

Because the courses offered by the Trust are freeof charge to the students, motivated students whonevertheleaS require additional time to absorb thematerial can learn at their own pace--,-and, accord:ing to the instructor, "once it clicks i,he worst hur-dle is over and the rest comes with ar 'application.' On the other hand, gt eat varietyof aptitude and learning speeds within a singleclass does_ present a problem for the instructor andholds back the faster learners. The newly insti-tuted enrollment controls should relieve thia pith=lem to some extent, especially in PC II and III,but it is doubtful that it can be entirely solved.Shriller problems have been noted in classes de-livered by-reprogrammable equipment vendor-aand by many teachers of introductory courses ina vast array of disciplines.

A final problem noted by the instructor is 6.1§oone that is common to other industrial trainingcourses involving reprogrammable equipment; TheProbitkm=reSistance on the part of many "studentsin the basic course-to the new concepts, theories,and techniques that must be learnedmanifestsitself in the Training Trust PC I classes as an ini-tial attitude of skepticism held by as many as halfof the first-night enrollees. The instructor, there-fore, &vote§ a portion of the first night's lectureto age-tier-al discussion of the-growth of solicI=Statecontrols and computer-aided equipment and thepresent and potential effects of the changing tech-nolegy On an electrician's job;

He then presents his own perception of thetrade that; in the very near future, if not in theimmediate PreSent, there will be two kinds of elec-tricians: technicians and those who as the tech-nology expands, will be stuck with lower level jobs.Techniciane, he says, will get better; steadier work,While the others will spend more and more time inthe hiring hall.

While most of the students respond positivelyto his appraisal, a few maintain their skepticismand either drop out of the class or continue attend-ing without applying themaelves to the course ma-terial. In many cases, it is older workers who are

either nearing retirementor who face the pros-pect Of unlearning much of what they have spentyears learningwho are the most resistant to thenew technology, On the other hand, a number ofolder strident§ have leafried-rapicily-and-well.

Evaluation of Present and Future CapacityPresent-CapacitY.--::According to local and na-

tional IBEW representatives and local represen-tatives of the National ElectriCal Contractors AS=sociation; the Los Angeles Electrical TrainingTrust has the financial resources and the solidbacking of both management and_labor requiredto maintain its current level of high-technologytraining and to extend that training into otherhigh=teehnolegy fields as the needs arise. LocalIBEW and NECA officials believe that their Werk-ing relationship is among the best in thecountry,and this Sentiment is echoed by individual contrao-tor§, union members, and the TrainingTrust Staff.The relationship between the union and the con-tractors' association is, of course, a crucial factoraffeetitig the administration, direction; and theSpecific training courses offered by, the Truat, alikethe trustee committee, the educational commit-tees, and all Of the Subcommittees have equal rep-re§eritatiOn by labor and management.

High-technology training courses like those inprogrammable controllers and process instrumen-tation are clearly advantageous to both_ the unionand the contractors' association. According CO theWestinghouse instructor, PC manufacturers arealready haVing diffieulty keeping up with installa-tion and service support requests. As the PC Mar-ket expands, manufacturers like Westinghousewillas Allen Bradley, Texas Instruments; andModicon have already doneturn more and moreto support system houses operated by electricalcontractors and diatiibutOrs to provide design; en-gineering, inatallation, and service to the end=user.* This will result in expanded opportunitiesfor electrical contractors and a correspondingly ex-panded need for electricians trained in PC installa-tion and service.

PC III training is especially beneficial to thesmall contractor who operates independently ofthe major manufacturers and who does not havethe advantage of distributing the equipment or of

'Whereas Allen Bradley, Modscon. and Texas Instruments use sys-tem houses for sales as well as design. Installation, and support serv-ices to the customer, WeStinghouee plans to continue selling its ownsystems and to recommend certain system houses for engineering and

service.

Appendix ASeldcted Case Studies: Summaries 445

customer referral .by the manufacturers. Suchsmall-to-medium contractors must be able to han-dle installation and service of a variety of modelsin order to bid on a larger number of contracts andto purchase the best and most cost-effective sys-tems for his customers' specific needs. It is; there-fore; to their obvious advantage to have perma-nent employees who are well-versed in a numberof different systems and to be able to place PC"specialty calls" in the hiring hall when they needextra workers for a ku-ge installation.

Local contractors interviewed had installed pro-grammable controllers in a wide variety of enter-prises. including food processing plants, refineries;breweries, battery plants, and shipyards. A num-ber of contractors specialize in conveyor systemsand had installed PC-automated conveyors in man-ufacturing and processing plants and in airports.Two of the larger contractors had, in the past, in-stalled PCs in auto assembly plants--includingFord; GM, Toyota America, and Honda. Now,however. they are feeling the effects of the econom-ic downturn and are forced:to look out of the areafor large; heavy manufacturing installation jobs;

Although the depressed state of some segmentsof the local construction market has resulted infewer contracts and less work for uectricians atthe present time, both management and union of-ficials are committed to increasing the training et:fort. The relatively favorable construction marketin years past has produced a sizable trust fund;making it possible for the trustees to invest in theequipment and courses they believe are necessaryto prepare the workers to compete for present andfuture jobs. Furthermore, some segments of themarket show signs of an upswing. There has, forexample, been a recent resurgence of the petroleumindustry in the area; which has produced work forcontractors and electricians skilled in process in-strumentation.

Current Training-Retraining Issues;.--Higher Wages for Increased Skills? One of the

most significant training-related issues facing theunion and the contractors' association is the feel-ing on the part of a number of ccatractors andsome union members that thosejourneyman elec-tricians with high-technology skills should drawhigher wages than those who do not upgrade theirskills.

Supporters of the double wage structure forjourneymen fall into a number of camps: Somesupport the notion of a "super-journeyraan,"a journeyman who is, essentially, a technician withskills in such areas as solid-state controls, proc-

ess instrumentation, nuclear instrumentation, and/or fiber optics and who would draw a higher hourlywage than journeymen with "low-technology"skills. The reasoning is that those electricians' whoare already journeymen anu have, essentially; been"caught short" by the new technology should notbe "punished" for not developing new skills, butthat those who do upgrade their skills should begiven monetary incentives for doing so;

Other supporters of the double-wage structurebelieve that a "sub-journeyman" classificationshould be created for those without high-technol-ogy skills; Subjourneymen would make less moneythan fully fledged journeymen with techniCian-level skills and, again, would have a monetary in-centive to develop expertise in electronics;

Other variations of support for a double, or asliding, wage scale would norchange traditionaloccuptional classificatidns but would, in somemariner; provide higher wages for increased skills:This could be achieved by classifying PC installa-tion, process instrumentation, and other work in-volving high-technology skills as "specialist cate-gories." This means that journeymen working onjobs involving those skills would receive a premi=um wage for the duration of that job; Two suchspecialist categories already exist: cable splicers,who do hazardous work on high-voltage cables;and electricians who are also certified welders.Both receive extra pay when working on jobs re-quiring these extra skills. Those who would make .PC installation and process instrumentation intospecialist categories maintain that this would pro-vide an additional incentive for electricians to up-grade their skills without creating sweepingchanges in the occupational structure of the union.

Local and national union officials are opposedto the above-mentioned variations of a wage rill=ferential. The business manager of Local 11 pointsout that the- creation of a "super-journeyman" cat-egory would place a burden on contractors, whoare already paying journeymen a regular wage ofmore than $23 an hour in Los Angeler On the-other hand, he believes that the creation of a "sub-journeyman" classification would defeat the phi-losophy of the apprenticeship program and wouldserve as a disincentive for apprentices, who wouldhave a double hurdle bei.-,re becoming fully fledgedjourneymen. Creating a "specialist cat,egory" forPC installation; he believes; is a stop-gap measurethat would, while' creating a monetary incentive"for electricians, also place monetary restraints oncontractors. His approachwhiCh is also the ap-,proach of training and education representatives

458

446 Computerized ManUfacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

at International headquartersis to focus on up-grading the general skill level of Local 11 journey-men to include skills in programmable controllersand other solid -state electronic skills:

While both the local and international union rep-resentatives recognize that their approach is morecostly in terms of time (i.e.. that higher wages forhigh4(,:linology skills would induce more journey-men to take advantage of training opportunities),they also believe that the industry cannot affordanother wage increase. According to Local 11 rep-reSentatives, those electricians who do not devel-op the skills required by the advancing technologywill be less and leSS capable of- performing the workand will, eventually, "be phased our-I-en-use-ofinability to obtain work. International IBEW rep-resentatives 'concur in that prediction and empha-size that the value of a broad-based apprenticeshipprogram is that it creates a flexible tradespersonskilled in a wide variety of tasks. Highly paid spe-cialists, they argue, are too limited for the type ofWork required by the vast majority of contractors.

Future Capacity.The future capacity of theLos AngeleS Electrical Training Trust to providetraining and education in programmable automa-tion and other increasingly technical electronic ap-plications is dependent not only on the internalcapacity of the Trust to provide courses but alsoon the continuing strength of the union itself. A1980 _electricians' strike resulted in higher *ages,but also caused the loss of 50 to 100 small contrac-tors from the Los Angeles NECA chapter. Thestrike; which occurred in June, was followed by adepression in tar local construction market; whichput further strains on the remaining union contrac-tors. At present; the approximately 40 percent ofelectrical contractors in the Greater Los Ange!esArea who still maintain union shops must contendwith nonunion contractors who can often under-bid them because of the lower wages received bynonunion electricians.

Both the Local and the International recognizethe problem that the higher union wage scale posesfor the contractors. What the union has to offer;they say, is responsible negotiation: an insistenceon apprenticeship training and an emphasis onjourneyman training; and a skilled pool of avail-able labor in the hiring hall that obviates thenecessity of "permanently" hiring in times ofplenty and firing in lean times. Los Angeles NECArepresentativeS and local- contractors interviewedspecifically emphasized their belief that the man-agement of Local 11 is both responsible and re-sponsive to.the needs of the contractors:

The L.A. Training Trustwhich stressed thevalue of increased, training when times were

goodis emphasizing it even more in times of dif-ficulty. It is building its capacity to offer moreand more advancedcourses to those who havethe individual motivation and who have respondedto the constant encouragement to take advantageof the training_ opportunities that exist.. The PCIII course should take instruction in programma-ble controllers well beyond the "familiarization"level of the PC I course: The process instrumen-tation program will produce_ "technicians" quali-fied at four advancing levels: device level; looplevel, system level, and instrumentation/process ,control level. The Trust is also currently prepar-ing instructors to teach fiber optics courses, andis exploring the possibility of purchasing a Heath-kit robot for a proposed robotics course. :

In addition,_ the Loa Angeles Trust has offeredto assist IBEW locals in other nearby jurisch:ctionsby opening the Trust laboratories to otlier Localsby reciprocal agreement and helping them to de-sign high-technology courses. InformaiiOn pro-vided by the Los Angeles ETT and by other localIBEW training organizations funded by JATCtrusts is also being used by the International train-ing organization to develop PC courses that, within the next 6 months; should spread to at least 100other training sites. The international organizationis also developing materials to assist local organi-zations in teaching semiconductor and fiber opticsprograms:

It is, however, utlimately the responsibility' ofindividual union members to support_ the Local'sand the International's claims of quality trainingby voluntarily upgrading their skills in high-tech-nology fields. The Training Trust itself is now fac-ing the problem of attempting to provide "qualitytraining" while, at the same time, providing theopportunity for all of the eligible Local II mem-bers to attend the courses. The_ evaluation and se-lection procedures instituted for the process_in-strumentation and programmable cuntroller'scourses go against the grain of the Trust's basicphilosophy; but they nevertheless represent prob-lems that are now being addressed.

To maintain credibility, the Inside ConstructionLocals must continue to provide workers whoseskills are appropriate to the contractors' needs. Iftraining organizations like the Los Angeles Train-ing Trust cannot upgrade the skills of significantnumbers of journeymen through the provision ofvoluntary courses, the union may be forced intogiving serious consideration to the "subjourney-man" concept which, of all the variations of thenotion of wage differentials based on high-technol-ogy skills, seems to be gaining the most adherents.

4 5:

Appendix ASelected Case Studies: Summaries 447

Case Stu4 5CAD/CAM Operator Training Program: Glendale, Calif.

SummaryThe Glendale CAD/CAM* operator training pro-

gram was sparked by the spirit of innovation andcooperation on both the State_ and local levels.Funded by a combination of Federal and Statemoneys and sponsored on the State level by twoState agencies; the Glendale program is one of sixpilot programs in California which bring togethercolleges; industries, and local government agenciesto train California residents to work in emergingor expanding technological fields. The Glendaleprogram, which trained participants with draftingbackgrounds to utilize computer-ak:.-....1 design sys-tems for mechanical design and printed circuitboard detailing, was a cooperative venture be-tween Glendale Community College, local indus-tries, the City of Glendale; and other local organi-zations. At the end of the first cycle of the pro-gram, 7 of the initial 12 enrollees were employedas CAD/CAM operators and three others found re-lated drafting jobs. At this writing; the second cy-cle is still in session.

BackgroundCoordinated Funding Project fel. New Vocation-

al Education Programs.Tne Coordinated Fund-ing Project administered undor the joint sponsor-ship of the Chancellor's Office of California Com-munity Colleges and the State's Employment De-velopment Department (EDD)is an innovative,State-level response to the need to develop voca-tional education programs in emerging and ex-panding technologies in a period of budget cutsand reduced resources for educational programs.The statewide project was created in response torecommendations of a legislative "Task Group"set up in 1979 to review vocational education inCalifornia and to suggest Iv w vocational educa-tion funds could be utilized mist effectively. In itsfinal report; the Task Group made the followingrecommendations; 1) adoption of State-level ad-_.ministrative policies to allow for consolidation ofresources; ** 2) greater private-sector involvement

Computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing."It was noted in the report that the existence of a "myriad of pro-

grams providing occupational training" had resulted in fragmentationof funding and administrative procedures and created a significant ob-stacle to effective coordination.

in vocational training, and 3) expansion of pro-grams linking worksite training and classroominstruction.

The Coordinated Funding Project is a combinedeffort on the part of the Chancellor's Office andthe..EDD to consolidate -State and Federal fundsfrom three sourcesthe Comprehensive Educationand Training Act (CETA), the California WorksiteEducation and Training Act (CWETA), and theVocational Education Act (VEA) to support piloteducation and training programs involving a highlevel of coordination between colleges, private in-dustries, and (in some instances) local governmentbodies.

In November 1981, the project staff sent Re-quests for Proposals (RFPs) to all of the 'Obnimuni-ty colleges in California asking for concept papersoutlining innovative programs in emerging or ex-panding technologies or labor-intensive occupa-tions that combine classroom instruction withworksite training in order to: 1) upgrade basicwork skills, 2) provide entry-level training, or 3)enhance or build on the skills of displaced workers,The colleges were specifically requested to design,programs for occupations not included in they cur-rent curricula and to seek new solutions for long-existing problems. Specific objectives to be metby each local program included the following:

to provide vocational training programs meet-ing specific local employers' needs;to involve local employers and other appropri-ate entities in project planning, curriculum de-sign; and training implementation;to provide effective job skills training to theproject participants;to obtain continuing employment with careeradvancement potential for project partici-pants; andto incorporate the resulting curriculum intoongoing college vocational education pro-grams.

Over 50 colleges responded to the RFP, and inJanuary 1982; four individual colleges and two -col-lege consortia were awarded contracts totalling$800;000 (for all six programs). The top-rankedproposal was_a program submitted by GlendaleCommunity College (GCC) to train CAD/CAMtechnicians. In February 1982, GCC was awarded$84;271 to train 24 participants (12 in each of two

448 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment; Education, and the Workplace

training tycleS);* shortly thereafter, five otherschools or consortia of schools were awarded con:tracts to train participants in fields Such as eom-puter-aided drafting, computer-assisted machin-ing, digital electronics and microprocessors, busi-ness machine and computer repair, and selar andalcohol technology and wood products manufac-turing.

The remainder of this study focuses on the CAD/CAM technician program operated by GlendaleCommunity_ College. In the fall of 1982; a newState initiative, titled "Investment in People," setaside $3,400,600 to fund other college programsof a nature similar to those supported by the Coor-dinated Funding Program, Glendale submitted anInvestment, in People proposal containing a mod=ified and expanded version of its Original CAD/CAM prograM and was awarded $55,885 to trainadditional participants in various computer-aideddesign applications,

Glendale CAD/CAM Operator Training Pro-gram. The Glendale program is an attempt todemonstrate the feasibility of, coordinating a va-riety Of funding sources (CETA, CWETA, andVEA) as well as the efforts of a variety of partici:pating organizations and agencies. The project isa joint effort on behalf of Glendale Communityrollege, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Singer Libra-

cope, Computervision, the City of Glendale, andthe Glendale Private Industry Council. The re-Mainder of this introductory section is devoted tobrief descriptions of these participating organiza-tions and the part each plays in the CAD/CAMprogram. Section II describes the project activitiesof each major player in greater detail.

Glendale Community College.Glendale Com-munity College (GCC), designated as the trainingprogram operator, is Weir accredited by the West-ern Association of Schools and Colleges as a 2=yearinstitution providing both general and specializededucation to youth and adults. Its four primaryObjectives are to: 1) educate students to meet thelower division requirements of a university or 4-

year ,:ollege, 2) provide post-secondary vocationaleducation for students preparing for entry-levelpositions and for employed students upgradingtheir skills for job advancement or to meet newjobrequirements, 3) -post- secondary education for"personal improvement" (i.e., coursework taken tosatisfy individual interests and which does notlead to a degree or certificate), and 4) adult educa-

*Each training, cycle consisted of 12 weeks of formal classroom./laboratory instruction, followed by 200 hours of worksite training atthe participating companies.

tion "below the lower division level," which in-eludes coursework leading to the high school di-ploma; career and vocational classes, citizenshipclasseS, and classes serving special interest needsOf the community.

GCC was founded in 1927 and until recently,was under the jurisdiction of the Glendale SchoolBoard, which was also responsible for the primaryand Secondary-level education systerri in the dis-trict: In the fall of 1982, a school board, sole-ly responsible for the Glendale Community CollegeDistrict, was created. This action is especiallysignificant in relation to the school'S regidar voca-tional education programs and to special projectslike the CADiCAM operators program in that thepresidentIsuperintendent of the new school boardhas expressed a specific commitment to vocationalechieation and is a member of the Glendale PrivateIndustry Council (see below); Approximately halfof the college's 10,200 students (5,200 fdll-time;5,000 part-time) are either enrolled in technical orvocationally= oriented certificate or transfer pro-grama* or take one or more vocational educationcourses,

The CAD/CAM Operators' Program was coor-dinated by the college's director of special pre=grams and was taught by the senior drafting in-structor.

Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL).JPL wasestablished by the California Institute of Technol-ogy (Cal Teeh) lib a private, nonprofit research anddeveropment laboratory.** Located on the out=skirts of Glendale in La Canada, Calif., JPL em-ploys approximately 4,600 people: approximately2,400 are engineers and scientists 2;000 are sup-Oa personnel; and 200 are engaged in manufae:turing prototype products (see folleling para-graph), When the laberatory was founded in 1946,its major activity was to complete rocket researchand development for the U.S. Army. In 1959, itbecame a Nataenal Aeronautics and Space Admin-istration (NASA) research center. Today, althoughitsprincipal contract is still with NASA, JPL alsohas research ancLdevelopment contracts with theDepartment of Energy, the Department of De-feriae, the National Institutes of Health, some Idealagencies, and some private industries.

*Certificate programs are primarily business or teChnical programsdesigned for students preparing to enter the job market upon coracle-tion of the program. Transfer programs are designed for students plan-ning to continue their education at-a A-year institution.

**Cal Tech continues to managJPL's CbtiCracta. According to a JPLsection manager, the difference be wean the research co_nducted at CalTech's main campus in nearby Pasadena tind that conducted by JPLis that JPI. is product development- oriented whereas the research anthe campus is primarily academic in nature.

Appendix A Selected Case Studies: Summaries 449

As a NASA contractor, the principal focus of thelaboratory's activities is lunar and interplanetaryinvestigationtracking and acquiring ,data fromsatellites and probes in NASA's deep space net-work: Currently operating at a funding levelof justover $350 million, JPL concentrates on research;development, and design of products. Its manufac-turing activity, therefore, is limited to the produc-tion of prototypes and is _a proportionately'smallpart of the lab's responsibilities. For this reason,JPL has little computer-aided production equip7ment; it does; however; have approximately 500computers (ranging from mainframes to micros)which are primarily used for computer-aided de-sign and other computer-aided engineering appli-cations such as analysis and simulation 'of engi,.neering data.*

According to JPL's Design and Mechanical Sup-port Section manager; JPL's concentration on de-velopment; desigm and "first article delivery"means that the laboratory uses computers andcomputer-aided systems primarily as analyticaltools rather than as production tools: The currentfocus of the Design and Mechanical Support Sec-tion is to attempt to save money and other re-sources in the preliminary stays of manufactur-ing by infusing into the design process the abilityto do simultaneous analysis, material selection,and selection of fabrication work in an attempt tocreate a product design that could be implementedwithout wasting material or having to reconfiguretooling in the manufacturing process.

JPL's Design and Mechanical Support Sectionpartipated in the Coordinated Funding ProjectpartiP'!y because of its growing need for CAD/CAM operators since 1980, when the section in-stalled its first Computervision CAD/CAM sys-tem. Accordin; to the section manager, the intro-duction of computer-aided design into the sectionenabled it to bid on and complete more work in lesstime and alsobecause the design engineers' _timeis 'considered to be too valuable to do detail anddocumentation work on their designscreated aneed for a new category of employee"CAD/CAM

"Computer Aided Engineering (CAE) .. includes those computersystems designed to facilitate Computer Aided Design CAD), ComputerAided Manufacturing (CAM), Computer Aided Business SystemsICABS), the Interactive Computer Graphis UCG), and rill those othersystems that facilitate the solution of engineering problems. It playsa key role in areas such as design, analysis, detailing, documentation.

programingJeoling, fabrication, assembly, quality control, testing,and all aspects of managernentof the data base_rele_vant tothe particu-lar product under consideration." Donald D, Glower andLindortE, Sal-ine Ied.L A Reqxmse to_A_dvanding Techno/ogiesiWashington, D.C.:American Siiciety for Engineering Education, 1982), p. 7.

operators" who are skilled in drafting and in theoperation of computer-aided design systems.*

Approximately two-thirds of the participants inthe Coordinated Funding Project receive "worksite training" at JPLhands-on laboratory workon the Computervision terminals that both com-plements their classroom instruction at GlendaleCommunity College and assists JPL engineers inthe detailing and documentation of their designs.JPL has hired five trainees from the first cycle ofthe program and may hire some from the secondphase.

Singer Librascope.The remaining third of the\ original 12 Coordinated Funding Project partici-pants received worksite training at Singer Libra-scope, a division of the Singer Co. engaged in theproduction of_nrilitary equipment.

Like\ JPL, Singer Librascope required trainedComputervision operators and looked on the Coor-dinated Funding Project as a means of acquiringemployees trained to company specifications.While all of the trainees received the same class-room instruction at GCC; their worksite trainingat Singer Librascope and JPL differed. Those whocompleted their laboratory training at Singer Li-brascope were trained to work on printed circuitboard (PCB) designs; while the JPL traineesworked on mechanical designs.**

Computervision.Computervision--for manyyears the largest producer of turnkey CAD/CAMsystemsparticipated in the Coordinated FumdingProject by providing free training for the GCCdrafting instructor in its Los Angeles training cen-ter.*** The classroom instruction provided to thetrainees was an adaptation of four of Computer-vision's customer training courses. Computervi-sion also assisted by providing reduced-price train-ing documentation.

Glendale Private Industry Council cane: the Cityof Glendale.The Glendale Private IndustryCouncl (PIC) was formed in 1979 under Title VIIo! the Comprehensive Employment and TrainingAct. Title VII, the Private Sector Initiative Pro-gram; was aimed at giving business and industry

- --Previous to the installation of the Computervision terminals, the sec-

tion contracted drafting work-to independent drafters or drafting firms.It is anticipated that the CAD systems and the new CAD/CAM opera-tora_Will eventually replace the need for contract drafters.

**The students themselves were given a choice of industry site onthe_basis of their interest in either mechanical or PCB design.

***Computervision also supplied free training to two high schoolteachers, who became CAD instructors in a high school training pro-gram developed_ at approximately the same time as the CoordinatedFunding Project's CAD/CAM operator program.

462

450 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

a major role in designing and implementing em=ployment and training programs tailored to localprivate-sector needs.* Although the authority ofbusiness and industry representatives on a num-ber of PICs across the country liaS icirrietiM 11,-en

limited by the control of the local elected(deSignated as CETA Prime Sponsors) over PICactivities, the Glendale PIC has effected a viableworking relationship between local government;education, and industry representatives:

In order to describe the role played by PIC inthe Coordinated Funding CAD/CAM OperatorProgram, it is first necessary to provide a fewParagraphs of background material on PIC itselfand its relationship with its Prime SpOn Sot, theCity of Glendale. PIC's board is primarily com-posed of business and industry representatives butalio has representation from local government andcommunity groups, including the Glendale UnifiedSchool District, the Employment' DevelopmentDePartment, and the Department of Social Serv-iCeS. In 1981. PIC merged with the CETA ACM=sor2,. CotincilAwhich was under the jurisdiction_ ofthe City of Glendale, in its role as CETA PrimeSponior).

The merger occurred at_a time when a numberof other PICs and Prime Sponsors in other locali-ties were also consolidating councils; in some loca-tiOnS, the mergers were seen by one or the otherof the groups as "take-over bids" and were aCCOrn-panied by vituperation on both sides. 'In Glendaleand in some other locations. the consolidation ofcouncils was seen as a reinforcement of an alreadyeffective cooperative relationship. According tothe present PIC director, PIC and the city haveyet to disagree on matters of program or policy;largely because there is general agreement thatPIC should act as the policymaking body while theCity acts as the administrative body.

Another factor that enhaneeS PIC'S ability tofunction in a coordinated manner is that it haseliminated duplication of services by designatingSpecific types of training delivery to specific

. groups in the Glendale area. Glendale Communi-ty cbtlege, for example, provides classroom in-StruetiOn and skills training under contract to PIC:another designated contractor is responsible forwork experience for youth, for example; and yetanother takes responsibility for in-school youth

rh. successor to ci;TA. the Jobs Training Partnership Act, retainsthe private,industrycouneils created under CE-TA and expands theirresponsibility and authority. In order to be certified under the new actwhich requires a service delivery area with poptilation of 200,000 ormorethe Glendale PIC consolidated its council with the nearby Bur.bank PIC in 1983.

programs: PIC board members and staff believethat these measures have helped it to become thetop-ranked council in terms_ of job placement in theDOL region covering California, Nevada, andArizona.

PIC played two roles in the CAD/CAM Opera=tors Program. Its formal role was to Provide ad-ministrative services for the program, includingcontract compliance, recordkeeping; participanttracking and reporting; operational monitoring,and technical assistance, These services were for-mally subcontracted by Glendale Community Col-

lege to the City of Glendale, which; as the admin-istrative arm of the consolidated council, performssimilar services for PIC7operated programs.

The other role played b_,y PIC was informal butcrucial to every- aspect of the prOgram from con-ception to delivery: The Glendale PIC defines itsresponsibilities in a broader context than the ac-tual operation of training programs for economi-cally disadvantaged participants. ACCording toboth the PIC director and the chairman, PIC musthave a sense ofand be active' inthe communi-ty as a whole in order to be effective in its formalfunction of delivering private- sector training pro-grams for the community's disadvantaged resi-dents. The board and staff Members; therefore,perceive their function to bel that of fricilitattirs,or brokers; who can act to bring together repre-sentatives from business, e- cation; and govern-Ment to create the kind of Xvorking partnerShipthey believe is the intent of CETA, Title VII, andits successor, the Jcib Training Partnership Act.;

It was in its role as a facilitator-that PIC hadits greatest impact on the' CAD/CAM OperatorTraining Program. The proposal that won theCoord:nated Funding Project contract for Glen-dale Community College_ was conceived by the PICdirector and was an adaptatiOn of a -computer-aided design program for high school students pro-Posed by the chairman; who is also the man-ager of JPL's Design and Mechanical Support Sec-tion and a member of the* school program; which

*-BeCause the Glendale Coordinated Funding Project was net aPIC-sponsored prOgram, the question of conflict-ofinterest did notarisein relation to 11Ws role. Conflict of interest is, however, a debated issuein the new JEM_Training Ptutnership Act. According to a report re-leased by the National Governors' Association. "at leitat 15 states placetotalbans on designated officials from conducting tinaitioSS either with

the State; or local municipalities, or other governmental entities of which

they are memhers.7_$ome private-industry council theinbers in somelocalities are, therefore_prohibited from allowing PIC Crain-Mg programs

CO be operated in or for their places of bilaieess. A number of privateindustry councils, on the other hand, operate on the principle that PICboard- members can have the most impact -by opening up their ownbusinesses or industries to P/C programs, thereby providing_ trainingand employment opportunities to eligible participants and, at_t_hesantetime, illustrating by example that such programs can be effective for

46d

-- - -- - ----

was designed to_familiarize high school studentswith CAD/CAM technology and to encouragethem to continue their education in computer-aided technologies;

The college program, on the other hand, was con-ceptualfred as a means of serving the participatingstudents and companies alike by training the stu-dents to fill immediate employment needs at JPLand Singer. Both programs were designed to servetheir respective educational institutions by up-grading teachers; introducing new technologicalcurricula, and providing courses that would even-tually be incorporated into the ongoing curriculaof both the college and the high school.

The CAD/CAM program, then, resulted fromthe synergistic'ynergistic relationship between PIC, the col-lege, and industries like the Jet Propulsion Lab-

,oratory. it derives also from the leadership of in-dividuals like the JPL section manager, whose ac-tivities in other arenas (as PIC chair and as SchoolBoard member) provided him with both the broad-based perspective and the position to effect thecoordination called for in the State's CoordinatedFunding Proposal.

CAD/CAM Operator Training ProgramGoals and Objectives.Overall goals of the

CA D/CAM.Operators' Program are: 1) to developa training program hi CAD/CAM which could beincorporated into the community college systemin Glendale; and which could be replicated at othercommunity colleges, and 2) tc tram 24 participantsto be CAD/CAM operators. Apart from those over-all goals (which are primarily those of the college),PIC, JPL; and Singer Librascope each had addi-tional objectives for their project participation.

Private Industry Council representatives viewedthe Coordinated Funding Project at an opportuni-ty to strengthen the bond between the college andlocal industries by demonstrating that the two entitles could work together in a project that could

emplyers- In the NGA report citiLd abovewhich specifically addressesthe question of conflict -of- interest in regard to the new JOD TrainingPartnership Actthe Georgia Employment and Trai_ning Councilspecifically recommends that "Fedora! regulations concernin_g conflicts-of.interest_which are presently Wog drafted exempt, PIC members fromprohibitions against conducting_business in their own or any other serv-ice delivery area where: 11 such member notifies in writing Hi poten-tial conflict of interest, to the council or administrative entity; 21 suchmember refrains from voting or in any way participating in the deci-sion to award contracts; and 31 the council or administrative entitymakes as a part of its record the reasons for awarding the contract toone of its PIC memhers and why the award is in the public's best, inter.est." I tnp1.2menting the Job Training Partnership Act. Technical Brief:Conflict of Intel-mt.,' National Governors' Association. December 1982.Issue paper presented for response.

Appendix ASelected Case Studies: Summaries 451

benefit each while also helping the community bytraining and employing local residents. In partic-ular; PIC hoped to showcase the college as a re-source for local industries which could, by assum-ing industrial training responsibilities, help thecompanies save on training expenses. PIC also sawits participation in the project as a way to partakein an effort to-build the community's capacity toengage in high-technology training whichin theopinion of key staff and board membersmay notbe appropriate for the majority of CETA-eligibleresidents without the necessary backgroundskills.* By helping the community to establish ahigh-tech training capacity, PIC hoped to establisha training resource which could eventually be usedby economically disadvantaged participants whomNC would first provide with prerequisite skillssuch as drafting.

Although Jet Propulsion Laboratory and SingerLibrascope had a major objective in commonthat of obtaining employees specifically trained totheir work requirements- their secondary objec-tives differed; One basic difference was that Singerrequired students trained as detailersi.e., CAD/CAM operators who do detail work on designscreated by otherswhereas JPL wanted traineeswho would do some basic design work and even-tually become full-fledged designers.

Consequently, JPL informed all of the_studentswho completed their wOrksite training at the lab-oratory that those who would be hired would beexpected to continue their education (at companyexpense) at a 4-year college. A further objectiveheld by JPL was to build the college's capabilitieSso that the lab could draw on it as a training re-source in the future. Computervision's object inparticipating in the project was to support its cus-tomersJPL and Singer Librascopeby assistingin the instruction of their future employees; andto assist the college by helping it to develop thecapability to create an ongoing computer-aided de-sign course utilizing Computervision equipment

Planning and Development. The State-levelplanning for the Coordinated Funding Project andmuch of the local-level planning for the Glendaleprogram have been outlined in section I of thisstudy. This section will, therefore, discuss the pry -gram development efforts that took place after theselection of Glendale as a contract recipient;

*Because the CETA funds used in the Coordinated Funding Projectwere discretionary linkages funds earmarked for project administrativeexpenses, the project operators were not bound to meet CETA seloction criteria, although they were urged to include as many CETA-eligi-ble participants as possible.

464

452 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

Previou§ to the writing of the proposal. bothJPL and Singer Librascope had made commit-ments to participate in the program. Once the pro-posal was accepted, PIC contacted Computervi-sion and secured its commitment to provide train-ing for the Glendale instructor. The school's engi-neering drafting instructor, Who alio works part-time at JPL as a senior engineer, was chosen asthe CAD/CAM program Instructor arid was giventhe responsibility of designing the curriculum.

To prepare for hiS curriculum - writing and in-structional duties, the instructor atte7.uisd a sum-mer-long upgrading program. He began hiS train-ing by completing a Week=long Computer visionSelf-study course at JPL, followed by a week of on-the-job training in JPL's CAD/CAM operations.During the following 9_ weeks; he attended 100hours of training at Computervision's Los Angelestraining center, completing customer courses inmechanical design and electromechanical design.The week-long courses at Computervision weresupplerneritei? by on-the-job training at both Sing-er Librascope and JPL. At the completion of histraining, the instructor designed the claSiroomtraining curriculum for the program, aided by ad-vice from JPL employees;

Bezause the world Le receiving claSS=room instructior, at, ;:allege and laboratorytraining at ono of the participating firms; much ofthe program development effort included settingup formal mechanisms for coordinating betweenJPL, Singer Libra§cope, PIC, and the school. Thatcoordination involved logistics planning. Discus-sions between the college and the two companiesresulted in a plan *hereby students would attend3:hour lectures at the college two mornings a weekand laboratory training two late afternoons orevenings a week (to EiVoid students competing withemployees for workstations).

Administrative and Instructional Staff.As theprimary program operator, Glendale CommunityCollege had fiScal responsibility for the project. Itwas also responsible for delivering classroom andlaboratory training and for appointing a programcounselor to act as liaison between the students,the college, and the participating companies._ Thecollege's director of special projects for vocationaleducation served as the overall p. °gram adminis-trator. Administrative services were subcon-

tracted to the City of_Glendale/Private IndustryCouncil, while the college retained the activitiesof recruitment, screening and selection, counsel-ing,_and placement: The college's engineeringdrafting instructor was responsible for deliveringthe classroom instruction, overseeing the labora-tory instruction at JPL, and coordinating with thetwo companies:_ The instructor, a past graduate of GlendaleCommunity College, has a bachelor's degree in in-dustrial design from California State Universityat Los Angeles. a master's degree in induStrialdesign from California State University at SanJose, and a vocational education teaching creden-tial from the University of California at Berkeley.His previous industr:al experience includes workat Columbia Broadcasting Corp. as a designer; atGeneral Electric's Nuclear Engineering DiviF.'sonas a packaging engineer, and at IBM as a seniordesign engineer.

Facilities and Equipment; Classroom instruc-tion was delivered at Glendale Community Col-lege, which has a fully equipped traditional draft-ing classroom, but no computer-aided design sta-tions. Eight of the initial class of 12 students at-tended the laboratory portion of their training atJPL, which has four Computervision terminalsdedicated to training purpose& The renittining_stu-dents had their laboratory instruction at SingerLibra:scope, which has four Computervision term-inals in its engineering department for use by pro-gram trainees ,and Singer employees alike.

Piogiant Funding.Glenddle Community Col-lege received $84,271 from the Coordinated Fund-ing Project ($3,243 from CETA; S19,533 fromCWETA; and $61,495 from VEA). The CETAfunds and approximately half of the CWETAfunds were subcontracted to the City of Glendaleto cover administrative services, and the remain-der of the CWETA funds paid for aportion of theinstructor's retraining (4 weeks of on-the-job train-ing at JPL and 4 weeks at Singer Librascope). TheVEA funds were devoted primarily to covering thedirect costs of the training for the 24 participants;In addition to the State funding; the participatingfirms provided the following in-kind contributiona:100 hours of computer-aided design training forthe Glendale instructor (Computervision) andequipment-use-and-maintenance costs for the

CAD/CAM terminals valued at $97,200 (JPL andSinger Librascope). Glendale Community Celle&contributed space and utilities totaling $3,800.

Recruitment and Selection /Participant Profile.In May 1982, the college sent flyers announcingthe CAD/CAM program to 2- and 4-year collegesand Employment Development Department in theLoS Angeles County area. Applicants were re-quired to be U.S. citizens; be 18 years old or over;have a high school diploma or general equivalencydiploma; be able to pass a security clearance; andhave completed the following college-level courses:

one semester of basic mechanical drafting;one semester of advanced mechanical draft-ing;one semester of descriptive geometry; andor equivalent work experience.

Recorrunended !Alt not required were the following:one semester of electronic drafting;one semester of machine design;one semester of basic electronic§ or machineshop:prior work experience in the above areas; andor equivalent work experience.

After making formal application for the programat the Glendale CETA office, the candidates tooka written examination at the college on June 12.The applications contained questionnaires request-ing information on the applicant's long- and short-term goals, attitude, and motivation, The formalexamination contained practical drafting prbblem8requiring a knowledge of tolerance:dimensioning;scaling, clearances, interferences, and electricalschematics. From the initial group of over 50 can=didates, the college representativeS selected 18 onthe basis of both test scores and indications ofpracticality, willingness to do detailed work forlong stretches of time, and motivation shown onthe application queStionnaires. Once the collegemade the initial selection; representatives fromJPL and Singer interviewed the students andmade the final §election.

The majority of the 12 students selected aa pro-gram participants for the first session, Which be=gan September 13, had previous machine shop or,drafting experience. Over half had 2-year draftingcertificates, and five_ of those students alSo had 2=year certificates in electronic§ or machining, Theaverage age of the group was 23. Two participantswere female; one was Hispanic; four had incomesbelow the poverty level; one was a displaced home-maker' and four were veterans.

Similar selection and recruitmec , re s

were followed for the second grouppantswho began the coursewor: try1983. The second group was approx.1 per-

Appendix ASelected Case Studies: Summaries 453

cent female and included four Hispanics and threeOrientals.

Classroom Instruction and LaboratOry Train=ing.The atudents received 12 weeks of formal in-struction (6 hours a week of classroom instructionand 6 hours of Computervision CADDS 3 terminaltraining per week). Because no terminals wereavailable in the college classroom, the classroominstruction was strictly devoted to theory, whichwas then applied in practice in_the_company lab=oratories. The GCC instructor was responsible forcla§§room instruction and for monitoring thelab-oratory sessions at both JPL and Singer Libra-scope: Instructional materials consisted of fourComputervision training documentsCADDS 3Pocket Reference, CADDS 3 Mechanical BasicGuide; CADDS 3 Mechanical Design Workbook,and the CADDS 3 Printed Circuit/Electrical Sche-matiC BaSic Guide * -and Computervision's self-study audio/print learning package, "Introduc.idnto CADDS 3 Operation," which teaches the basicconcepts and commands needed to use CADDS 3applications software.

Curriculum.The curriculum was designed toinclude the intrcidUctory material covered in the§elf=Study package plus three ComputervisionCADDS 3 customer courses: 1) Basic MechanicalDesign, 2) Adve :-ed Mechanical Design, and 3)BaSic Printed Cir 'Electrical Schematic Design.The first week of c' '.;.s was devoted to an overviewof CAD/CAM technology, during which the int,structor leCtured on CAD/CAM system hardwareand Software, turnkey CAD/CAM systems, com-puter-generated visualizations, computer-aideddesign and computer -aided manufacturing proc-esses and applications, and the integration ofCAD/CAM into industrial processes.

During the second week, students were intro-duced Co the basic techniques for using CADDS3 software, concentrating on terminology, log on/off procedures for entering and leaving the syatem,and basic command language. The lecture portionsof the second week of study covered the formatof commandianguage syntaxmade upbf verb +noun + modifier strings which the operator usesto execute a_ command by inputting a function(verb), such as "insert," plus a geometric entity(noun), like "line," _plus a modifier which describesthe geometry, such as "parallel' or "perpendicular."

*CAMS is Computervision's "Computer-Aided Drafting and DesjgriSystem." Students were required to purchase the pocket reference andthe mechanical design workbook: the school supplied them with the twobasic guides. 1_Computervision, which normally sells the basic guideefor $75 each; prov;ded them to the college For $30 each.)

4 6

454 Cornputori:,oi ,ifiulacturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

'lite. students also learned how to use the sys-em's online documentation feature, which aids the

operator by prompting r her with infoi'ma-tion on; for example; what "nouns- (line; circle; arc;fillet) go with specific "verbs- (insert, delete, orcombine, for inst ance) and what modifiers can beused with pzttieular vcrbfnoun combinations. Dur-ing the. laboratory _ sessions, the _ students com-pleted portions of the Contputervision audio cas-:-.ette/workbook course under the instructor's su-pervision,

Following the ba..,ic operations segment, the stu-dents spent 2 weeks (24 hours) learning to use thesystem for basic mechanical design. This segmentincluded the fundamentals of part creation (i.e.;hoc to use the system to create lines, circles, arcs,and fillets) and part filing (how to file a drawingof a part in the system); how to erase; modify; andmanipulate elements; and basic projections Mowto reproduce objects on planes or curved surfacesby projecting their points to create 3-D objects):

During the following_ 2 weeks; _the studentslearned how to insert dimensions in mechanicaldrawings (including linear, angular, radial, anddiameter dimensions, dual dimensions, and exten-sion lines and _arrows): how to use constructiona:s, such as grids and layers; how to size and scalepart -drawings; "zooming.' (focusing in on a smallsect ie in of tlw drawing on the screen or wideningthe focus to include the full drawing): and how toinsert textual notes and symbols to accompanytheir drawings: The Laboratory work during_thissegment consisted of working through specifiedsections of the CA DDS 3 Mechanical Design

'ork hook and completing individual projects in-ng the creation of 2-D and 3-D parts..

The next :3 weeks (weeks 7-9 of the course) weredevoted to printed circuit/electrical schematic (PC/ES) applications. The first lecture in this segmentcovcred the differences between mechanic I andPC' ES applications and operations. The studentsthen tote-tied to create electronic symbols (called"nodal ;n1,:rtnatiou- in Computervision terminol-ogy) and to digitize* and annotate electrical scne-mat icy. which the computer then converts into a"net i.e., a listof all the start- and end-pointsfor .,pecific wire paths on the board. By tht. eighth

the students were creating PC component

s..ers are inktromenteil ,urfaces on which the location 0 .:...sill an iissi slat cursorunit, is automatically conerted

ant: , and ssrilinate data suitable for transmission to a cone;nitr 'A I 'AM Computer Grhphics, A Survey and Buyer's,usite pp s 221 In the ec,ES operation described above, "digitizing"

means a stylus to locate points which will eventually be connected,ns t he finished eireeit board.

diagrams, digitizing simple PC hoards, and thenusing the system to merge the printed circuitboards and to automatically route the result.*They then learned to edit their PC boards** andto record the parts and computer files (i.e., to storeboth the PCB drawing and the schematic and netlist information in the computer). As in the me-chanical segment, the students were required tocomplete individual projects using the terminalsin the laboratories.

During the next 2 weeks, the students workedon specific electro-mechanical design problemsdealing with the design and packaging of printedcircuit boards. The last week of the course wasdevoted to review and to the final examination.

Instructional Methods.When he developed thecurriculum; the instructor was faced with a prob-lem intrinsic to the structure of the program: howto modify the Computervision courses, which weredesigned for students with 4-hour-a-day access toterminals; to be taught in the Glendale format (6hours a week of classroom instruction; 6 hours aweek of laboratory practice). A number of histeaching method: vw!re therefore dictated by thepeculiarities of the situation. A portion of theclassroom time was devoted to lecture on andclass discussion the theory behind the labora-tory work to be done in the following lab session.Because of the lack of equipment, the instructorused the chalkboard to demonstrate the basic primciples, and the students completed pen-and-paperexercises simulating the terminal exercises theywould perform in the laboratories.

The remainder of the classroom time was spentin group discussions of individual problems en-countered in the laboratories. (Although a numberof the students were reticent about discussingthose problems in a group situation, all were re-quired to do so in order to provide them with ex-perience in communicating problems to co-workersand attempting to solve them in a group situation.)The instructor's object in this was to simulate the .

industrial environment to the greatest extent pos-

. _

*The "merge" process tells the system that all of the componentsthat exist on this Isoard must be hooked based on the net list, sothat the informas .s on the net list is actually merged int, the printedcircuit board design. In the "routing" process, the system automaticallyindi,iltes to the operator the lines that physically connect the digitimApun

,I:r ii necessary because t .0 system cannot alwaysevery board. For example, if the system cannot get

fron, point .\ to point 13 without intersecting another point and sogroundingout the wires, the human operator must drill a hole in thehoard, run the wire along the bottom side, and drill back up to the com,ponent side so that he can continue to run the wire on an unobstnictedpath,

46/

Bible. Students were expected to produce profes-sional-level work; were expected to meet strictdeadlines for their twice-weekly lab work and forthe projects required at the end of each section;and were trained to solve the sort of practical prob-lems they - ould face on the job.

Student , worked two-to-a-terminal in the labor-atory sc-zsions, using the "partner system" thatComputervision trainers use in their customerclasses: Each student would work on the terminalfor approximately 15 minutes at a time; while hisor her partner would monitor the operation tomake sure it was being done c Aly and wouldprovide assistance when necessary: This system;according to Computervision, allows each partnerto both observe and perform specific operationsand therefore reinforces the learning process. Be-cause JP', had four terminals located in a dedi-cated training lab and because the laboratory oper7Lacs on a flexible schedule, the students who didtheir laboratory work at JPL had 4 1() 6 extrahours a week of terminal time. According to theinstructor, the students were all so highly moti-vated that they had to be forcibly ejected from thelaboratory at 11:00 p.m.

In addition to the classroom and laboratorywork, the instructor arranged for two field tripsone to the Computervision Training Center in LosAngeles, and one to Weber Aicraft to observe theIBM/CADA M system in a production environ-ment:

Examinations and College Credit: Studentswere given an examination at the end of each ma-jor course segment (basic operations, mechanicalapplication; and electrical applications) and tooka 3-part final examination covering mechanical de-sign, electrical design, and basic drawing. All butone of the students passed the final test and re-ceived three units of college for the course.*

Student Evaluations. i. written evaluationscompleted at the end of the classroom/lab portionof the program, the trainees gave both the instruc-tor and the course high marks. Most, however,stated that the course would be improved by moreterminal time and more time spent on printed cir-cuit board design. (See "Results" section for morerecent evaluations of the course by session I train-ees now working at ?PL and Singer Librascope.)

Worksite Training.Once they completed theclassroom/laboratory portion of the program; the

The one student who did not pass the final exam WW1 the only stu-dent Who carried a full-time job while participating in the progr;an. Thecombination of full-time work and program participation proved to hemore than he could accommodate.

Appendix ASelected Case Studies: S(cninanes'1155

11 remaining students began worksite training atJPL and Singer Librascope. This portion of thetraining consisted of 200 hours of work, which inthe case of the eight trainees; was divid9d into 10,20-hour weeks. Because Singer Librascope wasanxious to place its trainees on the permanent pay-roll as soon as possible, the 200 hears of trainingfor the three _Singer participants was condensedinto 7 weeks. Trainees in both locations Worked onactual production designs and were paid salariesof $5 per hour by the firms: (Customers were in-formed that the design .or detail work was beingperformed by student trainees, and the savingsin terms of lower-than-average salaries paid dur-ing the training periodwere passed on to the cus-tomers in form of decreased design -room costs.)

The Singer Librascope trainees spent the work-site training portion of the program primarily do-ing detailer work on printed circuit_board (PCB)--designs. This included digitizing PCB drawings toinput the design into the computer, editing ex-isting designs, creating detailed drawings from anexisting database, and creating photo tools. Thestudents who completed their worksite training atJPL were given some design responsibilities aswell as detail work. Their specific task was to workon mechanical designs for support equipment andperipheral structures, such as inspection plat-forms; for the Galileo spacecraft.

Given a basic design created by a'JPL engineer,it was the trainees' rob to complete the design,making sure that it met both the design and man-ufacturing standards (part tolerance and materi-al selection, for example) specified by the designengineer: In many instances; completing the en-gineer's design required the trainee to design apart or structure forming a potion of the total design. The design work done by the trainees. closely monitored during the worksite training period;is a significant aspect of the duties of those train-ies who became permanent employees.

Related Services: Counseling; Placeme,A, andFollow-up.Counseling, lllacement, and follow-up -

services were formally assignej to,the college. Thecollege's special projects department has a full-time counseling staff, one of wham was assignedpart-time to the Coordinated Funding partici-pants. In effect. however, most counseling was in-formal and was pro, ided by the instructor and theSinger and JPublie Law employees who oversawthe students at the laboratory sites. Althoughplacement services were officially the responsibili-ty of the college; P 'C representatives aided Gf2Cin placing those program graduates who were not

4 6

456 CoiThuleri:od Maniii,iCturing Automation: Employment, Education, and the Workplace

hired by either of the participating firms. Follow-up procedures. planned for 30-. and 90-day in-tervals after prograni completion, wereconductedby the college.

ResultsPlacement.Seven of the 11 trainees who com-

pleted both the classrooM Matt-talon and worksitetraining -portions of the program were hired byeither JPL or Singer Librascope. JPL'S Stated in-tention at the beginning of the,progfam was totrain eight participants its lab and to hire thefour who werebest-qnalified. The laboratory ex-ceeded its-original intention by hiring five traineesaf.tifec-ompletion of the worksite training in Feb-ruary 1983. The new JPL CAD/CAM operators re-ceived entry-level salaries of $6 to $7.50 per hour.Two of the JPL trainees were placed in other firmsin design and drafting jobs wh do not however,involve CAD/CAM operation.

Singer Librascope had orig. intended to hireall three of the studeiAS WE at the firm.One of them, however, faileu w pas;_ the securityclearance required for all Singer Librasco.ployees: That trainee has Since been hired bdale.Community College in a nontraining7i elatedcapacity. The other two were hired- by Singer inJanuary 1983; at starting salaries of $6.25 to $7.25an_hour.

Singer hopes 'to hire four trainees froO the sec-ond session of the program, Which et this writinghas not yet entered the worksite training stage.Whether or not JPL will be able tonire any of thesecond-session trainees will depend or the labora-tcny's need and 'funding §ittiaticii at the end of thesiinnner.

T L.: Investment in Pe;13Ie Project of_the.;ults of the CAD/CAM :i_peratior program was

.thieved well before the first gro,,- of participar.,,scompleted their classroom instrue. on. In October1982, the State Community College C:,,;nceller'sOffice and the EDD announced th.it additionalfunds for innovative college programs would_ beavailable ander the Governor's InVe§tment in Peo-ple 1lritiative. Glendale Cerritritinity :7ollege; againwith the help ...;f PIC and the City of Glendale, sub-mitted a proposal to expand the CAD/CAM o_per-atets' program to adapt it to a Wider range of applicetions (including atetiteetural; pi `' g andstructural design); to recruit additional applicantsand involve more local ifieltiStry; and zo providefurther training for instructors from GCE to helpdu college expend its already developed CAD cur-riculum.-

In December 1982, the College was awarded 11-vestment in People Funding totaling $55,885 toprovide 10 weeks of combined classroom instruc-tion at GCC and onsite laboratera work at theElectro Optic System' Division of :--,::!r_ox Corp.

and JacOli Engineering (an architectural and civilengineering firm).

Unlike the Coordinated Funding Project partic-ipants, 32 of the 40 investment in People partici-pants were company emPloyees requiring upgradetraining in computer-aided Because theXerox Electrci Optical Syste...:= r nployees were tobe trained for aerospace applications, a combinedclass serving the second -session CoordinatedFunding participanta and the Xerox Investmentin People participants was planned for the. winter=spring semester of 1983. The Jacobs employees,who were to be trained in architectural applica-tions, attended a separate course, caught by an em:ployee of Jacobs certified by Glendale College. Allof the industry employees received_ laboratorytraining at their respective companies; The eighttrainees who Were not company employees joinedthe Coordinated Funding participaz.Ls at Singerand JPL.

Benefks. Aside from the obvious benefits_ tothe trainee,. the CAD/CAM Operator TrainingProgram produced benefiencil results for the spon-soring companies, agencies, and institutions. Bothemployers _got CAD/CAM operators trained intheir epecific applications and operations for afraction of the cost involved in company-operatedtraining programs. Singer Librascopc, which spe=cifically seeks young; energetic drafters to betrained as detailers in computer-aided PCB appli-cations. obtained young CAD operators whose lab=citatory training was closely m nitore" by toin-pny employeesthus providii g the assurancethat they were trained in a meatier acceptable tothe firm. As added benefits; Singer representativesalso point to their participation in the selection ofthe trainees and the opportunity to observe themover an extended period of time

JPL representatives :nob. on the training pro-gram as a first F4-,..; in reducing the laboratory'sdependence on the contract drafting houses thattraditionally perform..J the_ manual arafti' func-tion now being replace:: by CAD/CAM. Accordingto themanalger Cif the Design and Mechanical Sup-port Seftioh, the section has been able to accom-modate double its pn nous workload since the in-troduction of the CAD systems in 1981 and cana --orripli§h in_ch of the work done by the contract

era with a smaller number of permanently em-ployed CAD/CAM Operators. Furthermore; sincc

the systems themselves are extremely accuratetools, J Pl-, can increase productivity and lower itsprice structure by hiring trained CAD/CAM oper-ators at entry-level salaries and passing he sav-ings along to its customers:

A n added benefit from J Plis point of view is thefuture potential of the trainees. All of those whowere hired by J Ph accepted their positions with.t he understanding that they will continue their ed-ucation by pursuing 4-year engineering degreesand eventually become part of the engineering de-sign staff in the section: In this way; ;Ill.-, hopesto achieve a number of long-term results: to pre-vent the CAD/CAM operators from becoming sta-tic; to "home grow" new engineers who will navea working knowledge of CAD/CAM operations and

'I, requirements; and to keep a constant flow ofnew CAD:CAM operators coming into the labor-atory by replacing the older operators who havemoved up to engineering design positions.

Glendale Community College, by obtaining theCoordinated Funding and Investment in Peoplegrants; now has increased credibility at the Statelevel, wh:cli may, in turn, help the school to ob-tain additional funding for further innovative pro-gritins. Of equal importance is the CAD/CAM ex-perience gained by the drafting instructor duringhis summer-long upgrading program, which wasreinforced by his delivery of the academic -year pro-:Tram. In addition; the college_ got_the opportuni-ty to integrate compu`---aided design_into its_reg-ular drafting curriculunian opportunity thatwecil,1 have been greatly delayed had GCC beenforced to wait until it could c' "` sir its own equip-ment.

Benefits o the Private lAdustry Council andComputervisi o_were less tangible; but were; nev-ertheless, significant.. By acting as the brokerbringing the major player.: together and develop-ing the operating_syst,:i:.s that helped the programto succeed, PIC demonstrated that it could fill theneeds of the commurity at large while, at the sametime; setting the stage for a PIC-funded programpreparing _disadvantaged _residents to becomedrafters who could then take advantage of train-ing prograins concentrating on CAD/CAM skills:__ The program also aided the_Private IndustryCouncil by rein fc:cing the PIC-built bridges be-tween t' College and local industries and by dem-onstrating the PIC philosophy in action; Le:, 0- itindustrial commitment and acadr,1,-rc training re-!-ources can be combined to benefit industries,schools, and potential employees. Computervi9:rin,by part sting in a program sponsored by JFI.,

Appendix ASelected Case Siuwes Summaries 457

and Singer; demonstrated its willingness to sup-port its customers in an innovative endetwor whilealso helping to provide those customers withtrained Computervision operators.

Froblems/Solutions.The necessity -of condens-ing the Computervision courses to fit the timeframe of the college semester and the need to sep-arate the classroom and laboratory segment s pre-sented ongoing problems. Although the Glendalestudents did have 12 weeks to complete fo-r 1-week Computervision courses; students, who at-tend courses at one of Computervisinn':; customertraining centers engage in intensivt! 8-hour-a-dayclassroom and laboratory work. In the case of themechanical design and printed circuit, courses; theGlendale students received almost as much termi-nal time as a regular Computervision customer;but in the case of the introduction tc, CADDS 3operatic a course, the coverage was reduced fromapproJimatelv 40 hours to 10.

It sho uld also be noted thn, Cornputery rion rec-ommends that its customers' employees have from60 hours ,f terminal time (for d2t.ailers) to 120hours (for desig.iers) after they ; the basicmechanical design rcurse to thoroughly familiarizet !-,em with the system before they proceed to ad-vanced mechanical design. This, of course, was im-p-issible for the Glendale students; who; becauseel time constraints impor=ed by the 12-week semes-ter, had to proceed directly from the basic to theadvanced course.

While the first group of students did feelthat the classroom/laboratory schedule w:,s incon-venient,_ the students who are attending the sec-ond cycle tie course do have a problem in thatregard: Those who do their laboratory work at Siner Librascope must attend labs from 11:00 p.-to 2:00 a.m. because the systems are in constantuse for production purposes during tb il.r_st twoshifts. This presents obvious difficuljeic foe thesecond-cycle students but alleviates the proi.,noted by Singer employees during the first cycleof the program, when regular employees were oc-casionally forced to work overtime in order tomake up for the periods during which the termi-nals were used for training purposes: A similarproblem was mentioned by some JPL employees,who had been accustomed to use the terminals"dedicated" to training for ;production design.vork.

A final problerr related to th- course structureis that the instructor occasir Tally hric difficultyfilling th:. mandatory 6 hourth a wee of lecturetime v.', :h cor.',Lr;:ctive material. While the chalk-

458 Corny Miintdactrifmti Automation: Employment, Education; and the Workplace

hoard demonstrations of terininal -operations andthe pen-and-paper exercises were helpful to someextent, the instructor now feels that 4 hours_aweek of lecture and 8 hours of terminal time wouldhe more appropriate for a course of this type:

While the instructor found ways to addres'ssome of the above-mentioned problemS in the Sec-ond cycle of t he program, others were lessameria-file to immediate solution. The 10 hours original-ly devoted to the basic operations segment hasbeen expanded toi(20 hourS. TO deal with the orob7lem of excessive -cit c roOtii}t.irne ,.the instructor hasassigned a term project for the second cycle oftrainees.

,A_§ part, of the projti-ct, students will write papersdealing with the advantages and disadvantages ofvarious_ CAD/CAM systems for specific types ofdesign work; such as mechanical, printed circuitboard, Architectural and piping. Each student _isassigned an in -dep' n research project on a specificsystem for a specific type of application, and theinstructor has arranged for more field_trips to en-able the students to see different systems in operation. .At the end of the course; the student§ willmake :-;ass presentat;Ofis on the results of their re-search, so i.fiat the entire class will hove some ta-e--.:!;arity with a wide variety of sys:.. ms and ap-plicttons. Because both cles,-6f the course werefirmly_ locked in CO the college's schedule by thetime the difficulties at.:r:ociate-' with the classroom/laboratory ratio tecarne apparent. it was not poSai-hie to make the ao:ustment to the 4-hour lecture/8-hour lab format which the inst-.iictor _believeswould he the best long-term solution to thiS Prob-lem:

Lack of adequate periods of irrie for terminalpractice between the basic and advanced mechan-ical design segmc, is is a problem which as yet hasno solution in a (fliii-de which is structured to fitinto an academic sc-:niester. Even if the college hada well-equipped laboratory dedicated to ,it is unlikely that the scuderitS have loggedin 60 to 120 hours of terminal tin-ic to fully ac-quaint themselves with the system hefore paneins from the basic to tne advanced Segment wthe t, should he noted, however, that ..hestu.:!..,nts did haze t he opport.;nit-, to_work_ on theterminals for at least 20 liou:-s a wee-- during the1.vork=:it v training portion of the program. There-for all 11( ),:;_-ii titOS7 may not have been able_ tomake 1,,,e tat t he ter-init.:3s at th_e_o_ptintinn periodin tin learning, process. th:y did have up to 200hours of experience on the terminals in additiont,0 the time spent iii the laboratory sections o:

al course.

A final problem, one noted by Singer represent-atives and by the Glendale instructor himself, isthatwhile the summer-long upgrading courseprovided the instructor with a grounding in -theComputervision courses he adaptiqi for his owncourse and a familiarity with the work of the Sing-er and .1131.i departments the student§ Would beworking inhis training was "barely adequate'to the task of training the students in advancedtechniques. The major difficulty here was notwiththe abilities of the instructor, who had years of ex-perience as an industrial designer and a draftingteacher and is familiar with _the operation ofanother CAD/CAM system. HoWever, while hewas e-faluated by both Singer and JPL repro-sentatives to be fully competent in his field andan excellent teacher; he did not have enough "Sys-tem time on Computervision terminals to becomethoroughly familiar with all of the opera.' os re-quired for both mechanical and PCB deaign.

This problem has decreased as the instructor hashad more opportunity to work on the system him-self and to observe the types of difficulties his stu=dents run into on the terminals, and it can reason-ably xpected to be overcome entirely with timeand ex r:ierience. Because JPL and Singer designerswere 1. ways on hand to aid the students with dif=ficult problems, the students did not suffer be-cau,c1 of the instructor's_lack of extensive produc-tion experience on the system.

Evaluation of Present and Future CapacityIn spite of the problems rioted in the previous

sections, the CAD/CAM operator training program-can be rated as an overall success. The twoemployers have gained trained employees who fillwhat they bah term as a "void" in their occupa-tional structure, and both Sinfrer and JPL Pro:nounce themselves to be very pleased with the peo-gram gr lcluates they have: -ed. The majority ofthe other graduates have obtained jobs; thelege has gained experience in teaching a CAD/CAM course and hopes to de z.'-Ae to integrate itinto its regular cur/ ard the Private In-dustry Council has strengthen, d its position as e"broker" _-:etween industry, academia, and therein _need Of training, and jobs.

Many -of the problems cited; are in fact, are nor-mal "startup" difficulties associated with theini-tial implementa' on of demonstration programswith limited del lopment time-frames. The otherproblemsspecifically those involve() in coordiriat=ing the resoth ce.., ad schedulea of the industries.

471

Appendix ASelected Case Studies: Summaries 459

on the one hand; and the college, on the otherare currently being addressed by PIC and the col-lege and require both long-range planning and flex-ible short-term adjustments to achieve a workablesolution (see beloW).

PerhapS more ix/Tortoni than the program'ssuccess in meeting its stated goals. however; is itsvalue in demonstrating that industries and educa-tional institutions can work together to meet theirindividual needs and the needs of the communitywith mutually satisfactory results. The presentand future potential for.the cooperative endeavorin high=technology training initiated by the collegeCAD/CAM program and its sister high school pro-gram, along with student and employer evalua-tions of the first cycle of the college program, arediscussed in the following paragraphs;

Employer Evaluations.Many of the employ-ers' reactions to the program and to the studentshave been touched on in previous sections of thisstudy. This section summarizes and draws togeth-er the overali response of the two employers whoparticipat. as major sponsors of the program.

Singer Librascope.-_-Singer representativesinterviewedthe manager of engineering and plan-ning, the super visor of the computer-aided designdepartment who oversaw the laboratory portionof the formal course and the worksite training, anda PCB designer who worked cloSely with the stu-dentS during the worksite trainingall believethat the trainees did "a great job" -mid are fullysatisfied with the work and m -itivation of the twotrainee- *he were eventually hired. Eventhoughthe th'rd trainee could not be hired for sec, rityreason the Singer emp'.oyees said that he, too,did "very good work" and that they would havehired him had he been able to pass the securityclearance.

The- supervisor of computer-aided design was ex-tremely direct in both hiS praise and his criticismOf various aspects of the program: He felt- hat theproblem crented ler Singer in the case of tl trrin-ee v ':;) was unable to get a security clearan couldhOve been avoided if more time and effort had goneinto the initial screening process. The_classroomtraining, in his opinion, vas "adequate" but couldhave been more adequate.' if the Glendale in-^i ructor had received a longer training conrse him-

'`: i tile ,rogram vas that,./. the trainees got a goo: basic taste" ofCAD: iS 3 techniques. the instruct:L.:in would haveserved -,.-/nrposes better had it been "morefocused'. on printed circuit board design.

On the other hand; he recognized the instructor'sproblem of having students who would eventual:ly be working in two different applications (me-chanical and PCB) in the sane class and believesthat some grounding in_mechanical design tech-

.fugues is necessary for PCB detailers.Overcoming all of his criticism of the program;

however, was the fact that the two trainees whowere hirEid were, first of all, precisely the type ofemployees he was seeking (young; intelligent. andhighly motivated) and secondly, were tailor-trained to meet Singer's specifications. The pro-gram was especially vii7,vcble from Singer's pointof view in that it trained .ittidentS who had draft-ing experience but who did not have previous corn,puter-r: led design experience; they therefore didnot he to "unlearn improper or unprofessionaltechniques" or teeliniveskspecific to another in-.dustry or another CAD/CAM system : - Six of thetrainees in the second cycle of the program are nowreceiving laboratory training at Singer Librascope,and tie C41?. oPpervisor hopes to hire four ofthem:

Jet Fzeciiils;-ar. Laboratery.7-Representativesinterviewed included the manager of the designand mechanical support section and the techngroup supervisor for computer-aided design. Be-cause the CAD/CAM operator training programwas conceived and fostered by PIC_Jwhich ischaired by the JPL section nernager), JPL's eval-uation may be partially perceived as a parent'sreport_of his child's progress. On the other hand,the section manager; being very much a business-man as well as a ;,;cieatist, is committed to seei:..;:2 return on investment in the trainees; and tohiring employees whose work me. the standardsof precision required in the aerospace industry.

Another facts :o be considered in JPL's evalua-tion is its philosophy of community participationand its approach to employee traiaing. The Jet.Propulsion Laboratory is the largest emiployer inthe Glendale area, -Ad its managerial employeeshave iinplemented their sense of commitment t.othe community by s on the board of educii-tian, educational ;,ask forces, and organizationslike the Private luAustry Council.

JPL's participation in the CAD/CAM trainingprogram, therefore, was motivated riot only by itsneed for traincdeperaters but by its desire to in-crease cc' ege's locus on high-technology train-ing so that t Le school could better se, ye the needsof ',nth the .ridustrial community and the residentscif Ciiendalc: Integral to his approach is the no-

4 '7 .)

460 Computerized Manufacturing Automation: Employment; Education; and the Workplace

tion that industry slibiild communicate _its per-CO educational institutions and work with

them to address educational needs,*Aside from attempting t:. strengthen industry-

education linkages in the community at large, thedesign and mechanical support section managerhas institutionalized upgrade training for all of theemployees in his section. Forty hours a year of up-grade training for each employee is built into thecost structure of the section; and completion ofthat training is an important factor in each em-ployee's yearly appraisal. This procedure, whichis in essence a mandate that everyemployee con-tinually upgrade his or her skills; was instituted

approxirnatelY the Seine time that theCAD1CAM -equipment wasinstalledin the section andgrows out of the manager's perception of the needfor engineers and support personnel to keeP upwith the dynainic advances of the computer-aidedtools of their profession.

The JPL representatives who participated in theselection of the trainee§ for the; CAD /CAM opera-tor program therefore looked for applicants whowere highly motivated and indicated a desire tocontinue their education; and five traineeshired by JPI; were those ivation bothto wore at the lab 0,-,t1 weir educationwas most apparee .s_ noted previously, :LPLsought trainees who would eventually bere-i:i ful-ly fledged deSigh engineers whom the training

provide with snpltisticated entry-level skillsand who -zad potential for career growth.

When :interviewed halfwa throlIgh the worksite' training period, JPL representatives were well -

Satisfied with the work; the_rnotivation, an thepotential for success of all eight t ainees. At theend of the worksite training, the five trainees withthe strongest desire to pursue eqgmeering degreeswere hired. Two months after they were hired asfull-time employees, they were,_according to thesection's CAD st;nervisor, "doing very well" andcontinued to be enthusiastic and motivated. Tentrainees in the second cycle are now i-eceivinglaboratory training at-JP!.; (eight from the Coor-dinated Funding Project ;:,rid two .b7nded by In-vestment in_Peop10.

Student EValiiatiCn.,.--Iiidividual interviewswere held with five sessi,m I graduates.the_twograduates hired by -Singer T...i1-rasc9pe cind threeof those hired liY JPL. The 4tiider.ts ,:vere uniform :ly positive about the instructor; -appreciative of theexperience ti;fty had received; and enthus tic

JPL. which is i n rutgi-Owth of ar educauon41 iratitution butor,aates like a compaiiy perharz_uniquelystructured to ate theor adernicifidiii,te!-, litikages ilEstrated by the CAD/CAD 1. ran..

about the current work. All of the students gavethe instructor an excellent rating. and some addedthat he was one of the best teachers they had, everworked with; They specifically noted his ability toprovide clear and concise explanations; his atten-tion to detail; his willingness to provide personal-ized assistance; and his patience and dedication.

While all of the students rated the course con=tent highly, the new Singer hires would have pre-ferred more class and laboratory-time devoted toprinted circuit board design. The other problemone mentioned by the instructor himself and all ofthe students interviewed was the ratio of class-room to laboratory time While most of the Atedents found the 6 hours of lecture per week helPfulin the beginning of the course, all Stated that morelab and less lecture would have been more appro!priate during the second half. Two students notedthat the small size of the class resulted in speeifiebenefita; personalized instruction and an environ-ment that encouraged the students to help eachother to explore a variety of design techniques.Others mentioned that the instructional material;especially the Computervision workbook; were ex-cellent and that the class projects were especiallyhelpful as learning experience:le

Although many of the scudenta were requiredto travel long distancesboth to the college fromtheir homes and between the college and the lab=oratory sitesonly one mentioned traveling as aproblem. None of the students felt that the tirr elag between the classrf,om lectures and the 'at,atory practice sessions created undue .

All of the graduates stated that the laboratory (yp.rience was the most beneficial aspect, of the pre,gramnot beciuse the lectures were not good, ;Altbecause of the necessity to i:rigtio-e in hands -o;:practice on the 64W:rimlit. Two of the JPL sta7dents specifically rnentionea the, helpfulneas ofJPL employees during the laboratory

When. however, the students were asked if theypreferrel the college-classroortiiindustry-lab-siteset-up to situation in which the lectures arid laboratory work could nave been eetralized in onelocation, all but bile said that It would have beenpreferable tlizzt tie Equipment be located at the cal=lege. The disser :ng studenk (one of the few whohad not had )us industrial experience) -laidthat -the Indus -nvironment provided him w, ha greater incenL, e to work harder and learn merethan v Ou'id hove been possiolt 1,7 a classroom en-vironment. All of the students; on the ether hand,felt that the 7 to 10 weeks of W3I ksite experienceafter the formal coursework was extremely valu-able, primarily because they were given "real"

4'7,3

work rather than make-work and becaUSe it gavethem' an opportunity to learn about the specificworking procedures of the two industrial labora-tories.

All of the students expressed their intention ofcontinuing their education at 4-year colleges oruniversities. One plans to pursue a mechanical en=gineering uegree, and the others intend to work ondegrees in industrial design.

Present end Future CAD/CAM Training Capaci-ty of Glendale Community CollegelAt the Cbm-pletion _of the first cycle of the CAD/CAM pro-gram, Glendale College, asthe program operator,had met most of the objectives set out by the Cobr:dinated Funding sponsorS. The college, with thehelp of PIC and the sponsoring companies; hadoperated a vocational training program that metthe needs of specific local employers; had involvedthe employers and "Other appropriate entities"(PIC and Computervision) in planning; design, andimplementation; and had provided the participantswith effective job skills training and continuingemployment with career advancement potential;The final objective of the Coordinated FlindingProjectto incorporate the resulting curriculuminto ong :ng vocational education pro-gram- haS proved to be more difficult to accom-plish.

Operating a program combining classroom andworksite training produced a number of beneficialresults, not the. least of which were the aVailabili=ty of state-of-the-a :t equipment at the industrycites and the opportlinity given to the trainees tocclimate themselves to an industrial environs

ment. The use of industrial labs and the instruc-tor_ upgrade trcur provided by project funds en-abled the college to demonstrate its effectivenessin training vocational education student§ to meetindustrial needs. The expansion of the programunder Investment in People funding also demon-strated that the college could serve as a resourcefor traininp existing industrial employees as wellas entry-level candidates.

The college. however; is painfully aware of thepossible "self destructing" nature of a CAD/CAMprogram operated by a - _ol with io equipmentof its own. By the end of the second c_y_cle of theprogram; both Singer Lihrascope and JPL will be"satui ated" with CAD/CAM operators, at leastfor the present. In order to keep the program run-ning, and to truly incorporate it into the ongciingcurriculum of the college, GCC will have to find

her sources of equipment.This potent;31 problem was apparent_from the

inception of th ni-Dgram. and both NC and the

Appendix ASelected Case Studies: Summaries 461

college's director for special projects have been ac-tively working on a solution. College representa-tives believe that the least promising solution inthe long run is to assume that_they will be ableto perpetuate the program indefinitely by relyingcompletely on indtistrylaboratories for the hands-:on portion of the training: They are, consequent=1y, exploring the possibility of obtaining donatedorreduced-price equipment to be installed at theCollege to be used for the training of regularlyenrolled drafting and design students and for Oper=ating _up_grade prop: for industry.*

TeChniCal Training Center.Another possibili-ty, one_which now looks extremely promising, isthe creation of a centrally located technical train-ing center., §upported by local industries; schools;and agencies and outfitted with equipment to at:-dress a wide variety of "high tech" skills includingCAD/CAM, computer repair, and word processing:The Center=which until recently was little morethan_r "-ived of-by the chairman of thePrivy -v beginning tolook lcome a reality.

tosed junior ::ugh sch of G.entkleaulci me the sit; education and business

leadets and local zoverninfor-mally

officials have infor-ally agreed on the concept; and a major producer

Of CAD/CAM equipwerit lias expressed interest inthe possibility of dorwting equipment: The currentthoUght is that the facilities would be shared byall of the schools in the district and would operateon a three-shift schedule; allowing for three; 3'/-hour teaching units in_each subject per day: Al-though such a center Lad be challenging to ad-minister and maintain, and although studentswould still have to travel toI-,boratoty sessions;the problems noted previously with regart: to coor-dinating production and training use of industryequipment would be solved, and the college wouldhave access to the equipment it needs to continueits CAD/CAM course and to expand into relatedareas; __

Future Potential.Glendale College vocationalediicationinstructors and administrators believethat a crucial elemer tizi the college's future poteh-tial to operate vocational ea .1c§.tion programs isthe Maintenance And expansion of the communicadon /channel with local industries. established

TI n mid-May 1983. the college mad:. the decision to_conr.aue the CAE

CAM training through June 198.1; funded with regular districtfunds. The lecture portion will remain at '..he college. The leb work willbe conduced in the pnvate sector at late night and early morning hours.In iidditteri the college wirrinistrationis now developing a foundationwhich will be able to borrow money to be Nsed, in part, to build new-laboratories to house dlr equipment and to cover equipmentmaintenance cost.

I

4/7

462 Computef;.ed Manufacturing Automation: Em,:-',)yrne, .':00^,ation, and Inc tttri(p;:14:--o

through such means aS the School's associatiouwith 131C and the Coordinated Funding and In-vestment in People projects.

The open channel to industry representatives isseen as necessary for a variety of reasons. Glen-dale representatives believe that colleges are 5 to10 years behind industry in techniCal expertise andsophiSticatiOn of equipment; and they look on in-dustry as a resource for instructor up ;rading, in-formation about new industrial adVanceS and hir-ing requirements, and material and equipment toimplement new courses:

The college drafting instructor, for exainPle,Heves that within the neXt few years mechanicaland architectural drafting programs that do notincorporate computer-aided design will not beachieving their major goal, which is- to pro-duCeready graduateS. In -eturif for industry support;the vocational education ision of the college iscommitted t_t, institute wh-tever ongoing changesare reasonable and necessary to meet industrialneeds and to serve as a training resource for localindustries:

Although the college's present Capacity to teachprograms in Computer-aithd design and manufac-turing is limited by its almost complete lack ofequipment-, the bridge-building activities of thepast 4 years (partiCipatiOn in PIC programs andrepresentation on the PIC board; recruitment ofindustrial representatives for college adviSorycommittets, and participation in programs like theCoordinated Fusing Project) seem destined tobear fruit in the near future; Local industries thathave benefitei from CETA training program§operated by the college now donate material;equipment, funds: The success of the Coordi-nated Funding Project demonstrated the college'sability and may bring iritire industrial support,open more industrial labs; and help the school towin more State funds.

The 1 'estment in Peoplegrant, whi-l- allowedthe school expand the CAD/CAM operator progra-71, 's but one example of ',he c.ollege's priten-

: to build on the achievements gained throughworking with loCal and agencies: Morerecently, the college was chosen as one of the possi,ble west coast sites for the General MotorS/United',.uto Workers retraining projects. The _programproposed by GCCa year-long electronics techni-cian coursehas Feen itccep'A in concept and willhe implemented if it proves feasible for 20=laid offfiM workers to either relocate to or travel to ( ;len-dale for the length of time it Would take to com-plete the course.

The synergistic relationship between the college,the Private Industry Council, and the City of Glen-dale is a major key to thj college's future poten,tial: PIC has engaged the support of its boardmember§ to aid the college in obtaining equipment.This, in itself, becomes a very powerful resourcebecause of the stature of the industries--7includingJPL, ITT, Pacific Telephone, and banking and fi-nancial organizations represented on the PICboard. Whether the final result of the effort tobuild GCC's equipment and laboratory resourcestakes the shape of a training center to which thecollege has access, or laboratories located on thecollege campus; the partners in the school-city-PICrelationship seem committed to making,tiSe of,.vliatever equipment is obtained to serve thebroadest possible constituency: _

The Glendale Private Industry Council.Whilethe formal role played by PIGin the operation ofthe CA.D/CAM operator program was relativelyminor; the importance of the Private IndustryCouncil as an informal broker between educational,industrial, and governments; organizations cannotbe overestimated. The idea for the CAD/CAMoperator program originated with the PIC dire&tor and -chairman; the PlC chair secured the coop-eration of his own organi7ation (,IrL); the PIC di-rector enlisted Singer Librascope and Computer-vision; and the PIC staff assisted in placing thecycle I graduates whfi "rcre not hired by the par-ticipating arils.

Although PIC's formal mandate is to operatetraining prcf-Tain. for structurally unemployedand displaced workers, the philosophy of the Glen-dale council entompasses a ._such wider sphere ofactivity than the direct operatioi' of government -funded training and employment programs._ Inte-gral to that philosophy is the creation of linkagesbetween the indUstrial and educational committeesto enhance the activities and resources of each andto serve th community as a whole.

In light of this philosophy, the role of the brokeris prbfound, especially when one considers the dif-ficulty of creating matches between the two endsof the labor market spectrum: on one end, techno-kigiCallY Oriented industries requiring many work-ers to have ever -more sophisticated entry-levelskills; and; on the other end, the structurally un-employed,* Who may have few workplace Skills,

*Structurally unernrhyed ir.dividuts are those whose situallori re-flect.s long-ti in changes in economic conditions, in contrast to the"cyclically unemployee- who are periodically withriiii work due to shiirt-(arm changes in the general economy.

Appendix A--Selected Case Studies: Summaries 463

and displaced workers. who may be only semi-skilled;

Occupying the vast middle ground are collegesand high schools requiring assistance to updatetheir curricula and upgrade their instructors sothey can assist in the job training process; workerswith ou tdated_ skills who do not meet the Federal

,poverty guidelines and are therefore ineligible forfederally funded programs; and firms whose work-ers require upgrade training but which may nothave the resources to provide that training in-house: By taking thebroad approach and makingthe most of its formal and informal channels ofcommunication between all of the sectors of thecommunity. MC hopes to have a pervasive effectwhiclr, in_ the long run, may create that match be-tween industry's high-tech needs and the structur-ally unemployed.

At present.. PIC is working on a number offronts, which; when brought_ together; may enableit simultaneously to serve the needs of _high7techindustries and the structurally unemployed. Al-though -the CAD/CAM operator program did notserve the structure>, unemployed; it did servesome displaced workers and some who were belowthe poverty level: It also strengthened 1-1,.e college'straining_cap_acity_and_aicied local ad-dition, the CAD/CAM program demonstrated thefeasibility of bringing the various participantstogether to create a successful high-technologytraining program and set the mecnarn:im rn phxefor expanding it.

This type of activityworking both formallyand informally to strengthen various _segments ofthe education and training system and concentii..t-ing on strengthening the links between the seg-mentsillustrates _another tenet of the GlendalePIC philosophy, characterized by the followingstatement by the PIC chair: 'There's a need to rec-ognize that nothing is static --once you get into it,you've got to be willing to move. The way we'veclone that is to address needs that are peceli,r andparticular to industry nGw. and we ask industryto forecast needs _downstream. so we can be re .dyto ' tut- our training pr.-grams to be ready at the

4

time that the need exists. My impression is thatindustry loves it if they're included and that schoolsystems are now put in the position- f preparingstudents for the real world. They're beginning torealize that they're both part of it and that theresponsibility is a shared one:"1_ To further strengthen education's knowledge of'industry, PIC is working to encourage localSchools to substitute a work experience programfor the traditional sabbatical leave for instructorsand cl to provide appropriate promotion credits forsuch a program. To increase industry's recognitionof the capacities of educational institutions; PICencourages companies to look on vocational educa-tion teachers as a training resource and to contractout in-house training to the colleges.*

This system; 9ccording to the PIC chair; wouldcost the companies less than in -house training andwould strengthen the schools' capacity to provideindustrial-level technical training: While this no-tion would not necessarily work for all types oftraining in all companies, it is likely_ to work in anumber of instances if well-managed and proper -:y desianed:

The CAD/CAM operator program illustratesthat industry -; lucation cooperative training en-deavors can succeed; in spite of the difficulties thatinevitably occur.- The problem now facing GlendaleCommunity Collegehow to continue the coursewhen the two industrial sponsors are saturatedand the equipment question is_still up in the airgrauoically illustrates the PIC chair's statementtnat "nothing is static." PIC and the college, how-e..-er, are ready to moveeither to move to othercompanies to keep the program running until apermanent solution can be found, or co acquireequipment or establish a training c,:triter. This' typeof irmovative approach to CAD/CAM training;Which relies on mutual cooperation while recogniz-ing that circumstances change and resources arelimited:, :.3y not be guaranteed of certain suc:ies,but it is most certainly well v;orth the att.('

In many_ thi:,..;,uld Involve providing industrail.ungrade train-ing to the teachers. as was done in the car., of Li., instructor.

Acme-Cleveland, 285Adult Education Participation Survey; 231Allen-Bradley, 281, 286, 287American Assembly of Collegiate Schools of

Business, 239American National Standards Institute. 88American Society for Testing Materials, 88American Society for Training and Development,

_222; 231Applicon, 275Apollo; 278Arthur D Little, 269ASEA Robot Co.;_118; 287; 289; 294; 298; 299A. T. Kearney, 302Australia; 296 298Automated Manufacturing 13esearch Facility

(AMRF), 307, 320, 322, 326Automatix, 236, 243, 292, 295Autoplace, 287

background, 25-26Battelle Memorial Institute; 302Belgium, 298Bendix; 285; -286Bleat & Decker, 291Boeing Commercial._ Airplane_Co.,_46: 271Boeing Computer Services, 233, 240Booz-Allen and Hamilton, 302Brigham Young University. 238, 240, 241, 245, 248British Machine Tool Trades Associ !don; 197Buick; 277; 296Bulgaria, 334Bureau of Census, 19, 164Bureau of Labor Statistics, 127, 128, 13(;, 379

Calma, 275, 301Camax Systems; Inc.; 171Canada, 14, 255. 285, 337, :360Carnegie-Mellon University; 85, 145 I 17; 316; 328Caterpillar Tr.ctor, 301Census of Manufacture.), 278Center for Occupational Research and nc 'ctoriment,

236Chasm S; H:; L,, kheeC Georgia; 43China, 2nChry.T,!er; .197;275; ,276Cincinnati Mila,7zon, 120, 235, 236, 270, 283, Mi.

_ 287; 289; 292_,296; 327Clark Equipment. 299Computer-Aided Manufacturing International

(CAM-I), 314, 329Computervision, 272; 273, 276; 277Congres",:

Congressional 1.1%idget Office, 377Congressional :research Service; 3'77House Committae on Science and TecEnology, 358

congressional interest and policy; 29-30

Index

Coniglaro, Laura, 289C-)nne`Iicut, 37_39,_59Cntrol Data, 274, 275, 276, 277Coordinating Committee on Research on Intedgent

Robotics Systems; 321Copperweld Robotics, 287, 291Corporation for Technological Training; 251Cross & Trecker, 283, 284 285, 286Current Population Survey; 136Czechoslovakia, 3Z4

Daiwa Securities American, Inc., 294Dallas Independent School District; 241Dassault, 276Data General; 274; 275Data Resources, Inc., 13"Dan ly Machine Corp. 277Deer; & Co., 67; 68Department o_ 325Department of Commerce; 284; 312; 319; 320Department of Defense, 13, 43,_58, 77, 137, 271, 278,

283; 289; 307; 312; 314; 316; 317; 318; 319;326, 329, 349, 389

Air_ Force Materials _Laboratory; SODefense Advanced Research Projects Agency

;DARPA), 13; 316; 317; 318; 319Electronics Computer Aided Manufactuilno

(SCAM), 315; 319Industrial Modernization Incentives Program

(IMO); 316Integrated Computer-Aided Manufacturing

(ICAM.), 315, 319IntAligent Taslo_Automatica(ITA); 316Manufacturing Technolou Program (Man Tech),

13;_314; 315; -316; 318; 319Naval Surface Weapons Center, 318Office -of NavaLResearcb; 13. 317, 310R&D funding, 314Strategic Computing proje:t.; 56. 87Tachnology Modernization (MCI-Mod) Tam,

316Department of Ernrgy, 325Department of Labor. L..1, 20, 205, 252, .4:7.4. 3:6, 389Deptwtment of Transpovtatioa; 325DeVilbiss, 257, 259Digital Equipment Ccap,; 85; 116; 274; 275

Far$jield Community Co lleg.. 242; 244East Germany, 334educati:m; training; and.retrauung issues; 219-265

case tittidies: salected instrtr)tional programs.241-255

ca,-.E:r guidance and prigrammable Y.utomaiion;249

jo;li couoseling; outph ,,ment; as retraining fordisplac&d workers. 252

needs; probler 3; and trends 244

4'167

458 Computerized Manufacturing Automation, Employment, Education, and the Workplace

roles, functions, and capacitieS of_programs, _241challenges facing the U.S. instructional system;

234instructional requirements for programmable

automation, 234engineers; 238managers, 239

changing context; 220-221current trends in instruction, 226-234

changes in emphasis, 232changes in entellment; 226

education and training in Europe arid Japan,255-260

effects of programmable automation and Othertechnologies; 222-226 - --

categories of instniction, 225roles for instruction in a changing society, 223

U.S. instructional system, 260effects of programmable automation on employment,

101:175contextual factors; 762-176

Ja_panese mechanisms of adjustment, 169labor supply; 164minority employment patterns; 170

jobs; 105-112task creation, 109task displacement, 107

occupational riploynient; 119-144rlerical wv.;1,ei.s,__140:142eil&neer::; I5,124

i =22 -144;.,-ruduction and related workers. 127sales/service, 144tech clans, 124-127

shift in skills mid occupational mix, 144-162compensation_ patterns, 153transient skill requirements, 151-153

qualification, trends, 2

ccllarlsalaried employment; 144-151intercompany patterns, 151overall effects; 146PA producer elriOlOynierit iniX, 148

skills; 1_10-112user industry, 112

geographic incidence; 115unemployment rates by StaU; 117

effects ofprogramrnable automation oh the Vidnitenvironment, 179-215

European -and Japanese Experiences, 209=21'2Japan, 209Norway and Sweden, 210West Geiniinny; 212

OTA work environment case StUdieS, 183-190,213-215

agricultural equipment. 186, 214auto company; 188; 215_commercial aircraft, 187, 214small metalworking shops 185;_ 213

work environmrit impacts, 191-208changing skill levels, 194

labor-management relations, 204occupational safety and health, 196org,aniztaion, 191training, 195

Electronic Industries Association, 88, 123Emhart Corp., Beverly; Mass., 55, 69; 204; 238, 246,

299, 328Evans, 276Ex-Cell-0, 285

Federal policy, implications of, 15-22strategies, 15

spc-.!ificpohcy options, 16ec!lication, training; and retraining, 20eniployment, 18t-?..cluiology development and diffusion, 16

ork environment, 19i Motor Co., 197, 275, 287ze, 270, 272; 284; 295; 307; 330, 331, 337

cograramable automationFiliere Electronique;_354Flliere Rebotique, 353

C'ranklin Research Laboratories, Inc., 294

GCA; 291; 292; 295, 296, 301General Electric, 74, 83, 86, 140, 164; 275; 281; 286;

2914_294, 295, 301, 327, 328, 334General Motors, 67, 140; 162, 197; 235; 247; 271,

277, 295, 296, 327Georgia Institute of Technology; 328Georgia Tech, 321Gerber Sciai.tific, 274Gidding & Lewis Machine Tool Co., 283Glendale Community College; 236, 241, 242GMF Robotics, 295, 296Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., 254Grade, 276

Harrington, Joseph, 71Harris, 275Henry_Ford Community College; Detroit; 236, 242Hewlett Packard, 275, 291HitaChi Sea, 284; 294; 298, 299, 334 NN,Honeywell, 255

IBM, 67, 74, 108, 240Industrial Modernization Incentives Program

(IMIP), 316_Industrial Science and Technological Innovation

Division, 323Ingersoll Milling Co., 283, 284Initial Graphics Exchange Standards (IGES), 320Insight. Technology, 277international Association of Machirrists, 390International Wmetary Fund (IMF), 342international support for programmable automation--

337-363Canada, 360Fr. nce, 352It cly, 362

4'

Index a 469

Japan, 340Netherlands, 362Norway; 359Sweden, 350United Kingdom, 356West Germany, 346

International Trade Commission, 285, 289, 290, 294Intersil, 301Intergraph, 273, 276Integrated Computer-Aided Manufacturing (1C.,,,:lv5

315, 319, 320, 334Integrated Programs for Aerospact Dee. 7,:n

(IPAD, 325, 334International Association of Machinists wad

Aerospace Workers' Bill of Rights, 206International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers,

236International Skills Olympics, 258Italy, 270, 283, 286, 289, 294; 298; 299; 331; 338;

362

Japan. 10, 13, 52, 152, 153, 167, 205, 209, 270, 281,282, 283, 285, 287; 294; 296; 297; 299; 337

displaced labor, 8education and training, 255, 258Fanuc Ltd., 65"Fifth Generation" computer project; 86Japan Industrial Robot Association, 46, 343Japan Robot Learning Co:, 343mechanisms of adjustment, 169Ministry of Education; 258_, 259Ministry of International Trade and lndnctry, 14;

340, 344_Ministry of Labor, 259Nissen Motor Co., 210; 259programmable auto/natio/17-340-346_

government concern; 342government mechanisms, 342government support to industry, 343

machine tool industry; 343research & development, 343robot induskry; 343

R&D, 307, 309, 329, 330, 332, ,'"33, 334

Kawsasaki, 289Kearney & Tracker, 283Kentucky, 281Kulicke & Soffa, 291

Lardaer;_James, 72Le BiJrid-Makitii: 284legislation:

Act on Employee Participation in Decisionmaking;1977, Sweden, 211

Airline Deregulation -Act of .1978;_380Comprehensive Employment and Training Act

(CET.A1; 255; 392Economic .overy Tax Act of 1981; 319Education Consolidation and Improvement Act of

1981, 391

Elementary and Secondary_ Education Act, 233Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for Jobs

Act of 1983; 378Employment Act of 1946; 378Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, 378Full Employment Act of 1978; 378Higher Education Act of 1968, 391Job Training Partnership Act._21; 254; _391;_392Manpower Development and Training Act, 391Manufacturing Sciences and Technology Research

and Development Act of 1983, 380National Defense Education Act4_232National Labor Relations Act, 386National Rail Reorganization Act of 1978Occupational Safety and Health Act, 387Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act; 380Rail Passenger Services Act of 1970; 380Redwoods Act of 1978; 380Social Security Act of 1935; 377Targeted_ Job:. Tax Credit, 379Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982;

379Trade Act of 1974; 254Trade Expansion A 1962, 379Vocational Education Act of 1963; 391Vocational Educai.::.,.:1 Act of 1983, 391Wagner-Peyser Act of 19L3._254; 377Work Environment Act, 1978, Sweden, 211

_ Working Environment Act; 1977; Norway; 211Lehigh University, 240Litton Office Product Center; 142Lock;ned-Georgia, 70, 275Luptt,n; Tom, University of Max. :ester, 239

Manufacturing Technology Advisory Grue71(MTAG); 315; 316; 319

Martin Marietta, 316Massachusetts Institute of Technology; 43; 151; 328;

333Magak Machinwry Co.;_ 283; 284

7 ' Computer Corp. (MCC, 329Mof. - .01Mona: iok. 285

. 276MacNeal-Scr,Randlt:1 Corp., 275

National Aeronautics_and_Space Administration; 13;77, 307, 31 ?, 319, 323, 325, 326; :- .71

National Associationof Temporary Sen.-i..es, 172National Bureau A Standards; 13; 3.6, 1r-; 81, 307;

_ 212.320; 321; _325; 332, 334Automated Manufacturing Research Facility, 13;

82;:87Center for Manufacturing Engineering; X19rnitial Graphics Exchange Standard, 77National_ Engineering Laboratory; 77

National Center for Education Statistics, 226, 255National Center for Urban and Ethnic Affairs; 251

4 8 fi

470 Computerized Manufacturing Automation.' Employment, Education, and the Workplace

National Institute for Occupational Safety andHealth, 20, 197

National Machine Tool Builders Association; 281National ICesearch Council Symposium on Labor-

Market Conditions fog Engineers, 123National Science Foundation; 13; 16; 123, 307, 312,

319, 321, 323, 326__ Production Research Program; 13Netherlands, 14, 255, 276, 362New York University 104; 148Niigata Engineering Co., 333Nordson Corp., 291North Carolina State University, 317Northrop, 276Norway, 10, 14. 20, 82, 210, 255, 270, 272, 287, 289,

294, 337, 359Norwegian Ministry of Local Government and

Labor, 360

Occupational Safety and Health Administration/20,386

Octek Corp., 92Ontario Board of Industrial Leadership and

Development, 361Organization for Economic Cooperation and

Development (OECD), 342Organization for Industrial Research; 277

Pentel, 289Perkins-Elmer, 275Poland, 334policy issues and options, 367-397

existing Federal policy and options for newinitiatives; 373-397

adjustment assistance, 384diffusion; 375education, training and retraining policy, 391employment; 376options for employment policy, 381recent legislative proposals._373research and development, 374standards, 374technology development and use 373work environment policies, 386

Federal role; reasons for; 369new policy, challenge of 370

Federal policy strategies; 371stakeholders, 368

Prab Conveyors; -287Prab Robots, 287, 292, 294Predicasts, Inc., 271Prime, 274, 275, 276, 277principle findings; 4-14

education, training, and retraining issues. 11employment effects. 5programmable automation industries, 12research and development, 12the technologies, 4work environment, 8

Productivity Systems; Inc.; 294

programmable automation industries; 269-304computer-integrated manufacturing: potential

market developments; 300conclusions, 302evolution and_outlook, 271-300

CAD, 271=278numerical control_and flexible manufacturing

systems, 278-287robots, 287-299

programmable automation technologies, :33-98computer-aided manufacturing (CAM)

technologies, 48, 68automated materials handling systems, 66-68flexible manufacturing systems, 60.66numerically controlled machine tools, 57-60

_ robots; 48-56discrete manufacturing, 35functional descriptions; 43_

computer-aided design (CAD), 43future of the technologies; 93-98introduction, 34manufacturing management, 69-73

computer -aided planning 70computer-integrated manufacturing, 71management information systems,

trends and barriers, 74-93artificial intelligence, 83-87computer-aided design, 74-77computer-integrated manufacturing, 82-83flexible manufacturing systems, 81-82numerically controlled machine tools; 80-82robotics, 77-80standards and interfaces,_82

Prototype and Plastic Mold Corp., Middletown,Conn., 47

Purdue University, 82, 317;328

Remote Manipulator System, 323, 324Remote Orbital Servicing System, 323Renault; 295research and development (R&D), 307-334

funding and performers; 309-330civilian agency programs, 319federal funding; 314industry fundin& 326national expenditures; 310selected agencies, 311

international comparisons, 330-334other sources of funding, 330

Tholen, Thomas P., University of California,258Robotic Industries Association (RIP:), 48, 148Robotics Assembly Institute, 294Robotics International, 260Rockwell International, 316Roth; Bernard; Stanford University, 72

Sanders; 274Schlumberger, 85, 275Scientific- Applications; Inc., 294Seiko, 289

Index 471

selected case studies, 401-463Brigham Young University; 408-425CADAM Inc., 426-435CAD/C-AM Operator Training Program,_ 447-463Oakland County Vocational Educational Centers,

403-407_ _programmable controller training program,

_ 436_-446Semiconductor Research Corp.. 329Shope Data; 276.Sharpe Manufacturing Co., 284Singer Librascope. 247Society for Manufacturing Engineers, 119, 241; 260;

271South Bend Lathe; 285Spain, 284, 298Sperry Univac, 275Stanford University, 317, 328, 333::tudy Ipproach; org,anization; and methodology,

27 -28Sun Microsystems workstations; 273Sutherland, 276Swanson Analysis; 275Sweden, 10, 14, 20, 210-211, 255, 270, 272, 289, 294,

__ 298. 299; 307; 330_, 331; 334; 337.Board for Technical. Development, 352Commission on Computers and Electronics; 351programmable automation, 350

government role; 350government support to industry; 350

Swedish Work Environmbnt Fund, 334Switzerland, 283

Taiwan, 283Texas A&M University, 242, 244Texas jristruments, 238; 289Textron/Bridgeport, 283Trade Adjustment Assistance Program, 252Trade Readjuqment Assistance Program, 254Trallfa. 287, 289Tyoda Machine Works, 284, 285

UAW-Ford Employee Involvement Program, 205UCLA, 240Unemployment Insurance System; 21United Automobile Workers Union, 162, 205Unigraphics; 276Unimation, 270, 287. 289. 290, 292. 301. 327United Kingdom; 14; 255; 270; 276, 293; 284; 289;

290, 294, 298, 331. 307, 333, 337Department of Trade and Industry; 357

programmable automation, 356government role; 356government support to industry, 357

University of Edinburgh; Scotland; 333University of Florida, 328University of Hawaii; 330University of Manchester, England, 193, 239University of Maryland; 217, 319, 228University of Michigan, 239, 242, 244University of Pennsylvania; 240University of Rhode Island, 321. 328, 330University of Utah, 76Upjohn Institute, 121, 136, 138, 145, 149U.S. Employment Service, 254, 377U.S. Patent and Trademark Office; 331U.S.S.R., 284; 287, 334

V,:rsatram, 287VLSI Technology; 301_Vocational Education Data System, 229Vocational Industrial Clubs of America; Inc., 258Volkwagen Werk, 294

Wall Street <Tournel, 339Weisel, Walt; Prab Robots, 148Western Electric, 291West Germany, 10, 13, 82, 152, 153, 212, 255, 270,

272, 276, 287, 289, 294, 298; 299, 337DWFG; 347German Engineers Association, 348German-Norwegian Collaboration, 349Messuschmitt-Bolkow-Blohrn, 65Ministry of Research and Technology (SIFT, 348programmable automation, 346

government concern, 347government role, 346government support to industry, 348researei and devtlopment, 348

R&D, 307, 309, 330, 331, 334Technical University of Berlin, 77

Westinghouse, 164, 238, 270, 286, 292, 301, 327White-Sundstrund, 283Wickes Machine Tool Group, Inc., 284Wider Opportunities for Women. Inc ., 251Worcester Polytechnic Institute; 205; 238; 242, 328World Bank, 24, 44, 105, 119, 267, 305

Operational Manual for Project Analysis, 248

Yarnazaki, 284Yaskawa, 294, 298

Office of Technology AssessmentThe/ Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) was created in 1972

as arm of Congress. OTA's basic function is to help legis-lativ policymakers anticipate and plan for the consequences of tech-nological changes and to examine the many ways; expected andunexpected; in which technology affects people's lives. The assessmentof teChnology calls for exploration of the physical, biological, economic,social, and political impacts that can result from applications of scien-tific/knowledge. OTA provides Congress_ with independent and timerly information about the potential effectsboth beneficial andharmfulof technological applications.

Requests for studies are made by chairmen of standing committeesof the House of Representatives or Senate; by the Technology Assess-ment Board; the governing body of OTA; or by the Director of OTAin consultation with the Board.

The Technology Assessment Board is composed of six members ofthe House, six members of the Senate, and the OTA Director, whois a nonvoting member.

OTA has studies under way in nine program areas: energy and ma-terials; industry; technology, and employment; international securi-ty and commerce; biological applications; food and renewableresources; health; communication and information technologies; oceansand environment; and science, transportation, and innovation.

OTA Publishing Staff: john Bergling, Kathie S. Boss, Debra M. Datcher,Joe Henson; John C. Holmes

483