director) should be definitely responsible. The policy thus includes such questions as the market or markets to be attacked; the quantities and dates at which it is estimated sales can be effected; the financial needs, whether it be for building or plant extensions or for stock-in-trade; and the provision of, or the raising of, the necessary finance.
In brief, in a well-managed concern the Board may be said to control that which is in military parlance the strategy of the company, whilst the management staff look after the tactics. Clearly, just as in military affairs, success must depend very largely upon the strategic scheme being accommodated to the tactical resources, and the tactical work being skilfully adapted to the strategic scheme.
Now, in the case of a Government factory, there is no real board of directors. The financial side is controlled by the Treasury, whose interests are not concerned with the prosperity of the concern in the least degree; it is equally satisfactory from a Treasury standpoint whether the "grant" can be reduced by the most arbitrary and expensive "cheeseparing," or whether it is done by legitimate and proper means—by the exercise of true economy. The result is that anyone acquainted with the working of Government manufacturing institutions could cite innumerable cases of gross extravagance resulting from so-called Treasury economy. Again, there is no one to formulate in advance a proper manufacturing programme with the least assurance that there will be the means available in order to carry it to a successful conclusion; even ironwork of a part-finished structure has been known to be denied the wherewithal for a coat of paint! The cast-iron system of closing the programme at the termination of each financial year without carry forward is destructive of good management. Thus the
170
