Hostname: page-component-65f69f4695-bd75b Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-06-29T12:51:33.939Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Automation, Transfer Machinery, and Mass Production in the U.S. Automobile Industry in the Post–World War II Era

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 September 2015

David A. Hounshell
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

First experimented with in the 1920s and 1930s in the production of automobile engines, transfer machines became dominant in U.S. engine plants in the 1940s and 1950s, as automakers invested heavily in this equipment to meet pent-up demand following the war. Transfer machines thus became identified with “Detroit automation”. But with the advent of a “horsepower race”, firms found that transfer machines could not accommodate even minor changes in design. Late in the 1950s the industry developed and applied “building-block automation” to transfer machines to attain greater flexibility. Examining these developments contributes to our understanding of both specific industries and the general history of mass production and its alternatives.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Enterprise & Society , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , March 2000 , pp. 100 - 138
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 2000. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Business History Conference. All rights reserved.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Bibliography of Works Cited

Books

Abernathy, William J. The Productivity Dilemma: Roadblock to Innovation in the Automobile Industry. Baltimore, Md., 1978.Google Scholar
Abernathy, William J., Clark, Kim B., and Kantrow, Alan M.. Industrial Renaissance: Producing a Competitive Future for America. New York, 1983.Google Scholar
Borth, Christy. Masters of Mass Production. Indianapolis, Ind., 1945.Google Scholar
Bright, James R. Automation and Management. Boston, 1958.Google Scholar
Dertouzos, Michael L., et al., eds. Made in America: Regaining the Productive Edge. Cambridge, Mass., 1989.Google Scholar
Diebold, John. Automation: The Advent of the Automatic Factory. New York, 1952.Google Scholar
Gartman, David. Auto Slavery: The Labor Process in the American Automobile Industry, 1879-1950. New Brunswick, N.J., 1986.Google Scholar
Giedion, Siegfried. Mechanization Takes Command. New York, 1969.Google Scholar
Hoke, Donald R. Ingenious Yankees: The Rise of the American System of Manufactures in the Private Sector. New York, 1990.Google Scholar
Lewchuk, Wayne. American Technology and the British Vehicle Industry. Cambridge, U.K., 1987.Google Scholar
Marsh, E. A. The Evolution of Automatic Machinery as Applied to the Manufacture of Watches at Waltham, Mass., by the American Waltham Watch Company. Chicago, 1896.Google Scholar
McKenzie, Frederick A. The American Invaders: Their Plans, Tactics and Progress. New York, 1901.Google Scholar
Noble, David F. Forces of Production. New York, 1984.Google Scholar
Piore, Michael J., and Sabel, Charles F.. The Second Industrial Divide: Possibilities for Prosperity. New York, 1984.Google Scholar
Piore, Michael J., and Sabel, Charles F.. Das Ende der Massenproduktion. Frankfurt am Main, Germany, 1985.Google Scholar
Wild, Ray. Mass-Production Management: The Design and Operation of Production Flow-line Systems. London, 1972.Google Scholar
Womack, James P. , Jones, Daniel T., and Roos, Daniel. The Machine That Changed the World. New York, 1990.Google Scholar
Woollard, Frank G. Principles of Mass and Flow Production. London, 1954.Google Scholar

Articles and Essays

Gasbarre, April Dougal. “A. O. Smith Corporation.” In International Directory of Company Histories, ed. Kepos, Paula. New York, 1995, vol. 11.Google Scholar
Hounshell, David A. “Planning and Executing ‘Automation’ at Ford Motor Company, 1945-1965: The Cleveland Engine Plant and Its Consequences.” In Fordism Transformed: Comparative Perspectives on the Development of Production Methods in the Automobile Industry, ed. Shiomi, Haruhito and Wada, Kazuo. Oxford, 1995, 49–86.Google Scholar
Sabel, Charles F. , and Zeitlin, Jonathan. “Historical Alternatives to Mass Production.” Past and Present 108 (Aug. 1985): 133-76.Google Scholar

Magazines

Advanced Management. 1950, 1953.Google Scholar
American Machinist. 1946–1957.Google Scholar
Automation. 1958.Google Scholar
Automotive and Aviation Industries. Feb. 1947.Google Scholar
Automotive Industries. 1928-1960.Google Scholar
Barron’s. 1954, 1956.Google Scholar
Business Week. Sept. 1953.Google Scholar
Electrical Engineering. 1955.Google Scholar
Factory Management and Maintenance. April 1952.Google Scholar
Fortune. Nov. 1946.Google Scholar
Iron Trade Review. Jan. 1930.Google Scholar
Machine Design. Jan. 1944.Google Scholar
Magazine of Business. Feb. 1929.Google Scholar
Mechanical Engineering. 1942, 1955.Google Scholar
Mill & Factory. 1948-1958.Google Scholar
Product Engineering. Sept. 1947.Google Scholar
Society of Automotive Engineers Journal. 1947-1955.Google Scholar

Unpublished Sources

Ernest, Breech, “Some Responsibilities of American Business in the Free World,” address before the Committee of One Hundred, Miami, Florida, 3 March 1953. Ford Industrial Archives, Dearborn, Mich.Google Scholar
Davis, D.J. Testimony before the Subcommittee on Automation of the Joint Economic Committee on the Economic Report. Ford Industrial Archives, Dearborn, Mich.Google Scholar