Categories
Economics Programs Economists Harvard

Harvard. The Data Resources Inc. connection. Galbraith asks Eckstein, Feldstein, Jorgensen. 1972

 

“As Ed Mason tactfully hints, I’ve had enough lost causes for one year.”–Galbraith

In the following exchange of letters initiated by John Kenneth Galbraith in December 1972 we find multiple instances of seething rage barely concealed under veneers of formal academic politeness. Critical hiring and firing decisions regarding the subtraction of radical voices from the economics department faculty went overwhelmingly for the consolidation of mainstream economics earlier that month and Galbraith appears to have sought a vulnerability of this counterrevolution in its potential for conflicts of interest as he imagined coming from Otto Eckstein’s start-up, Data Resources, Inc. Eckstein’s response provides us with some interesting backstory to DRI. Feldstein and Jorgensen offered their witness testimony regarding this early episode in what would ultimately result in the so-called empirical turn in economics

But even after suffering this tactical defeat, Galbraith’s strategic point was to be confirmed by history:

“I do have one final thought. In accordance with the well-known tendencies of free enterprise at this level, one day one of these corporations is going to go down with a ghastly smash. It will then be found, in its days of desperation or before, to have engaged in some very greasy legal operations. The Department and the University will be held by the papers to have a contingent liability. It will be hard to preserve reticence then. It would have been better to have taken preventative action now.”

The conflict of interest cases brought by the U.S. Department of Justice in 2000 against economics professor Andrei Shleifer and the Harvard Institute for International Development resulted in a settlement that required Harvard to pay $26.5 million to the U.S. government.

_____________________________

On behalf of the Department,
Galbraith wants to know more about DRI

JOHN KENNETH GALBRAITH
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
CAMBRIDGE. MASSACHUSETTS

December 20, 1972

Professor Otto Eckstein
Littauer Center

Professor Martin S. Feldstein
1737 Cambridge Street

Professor Dale W. Jorgenson
1737 Cambridge Street

Dear Otto, Marty and Dale:

It will hardly be news that I have been deeply concerned over the several recent actions of the Department of Economics on appointments as well as the academically less consequential problem of the less than gracious response to those of us who have expressed alarm.

There is an impression, of which you will undoubtedly be sensitive, that the positions of some of those favoring the recent action could reflect, however subjectively and innocently, their corporate involvement in conflict with their academic responsibilities. I do not wish in any way to prejudge this matter or even to be a source of embarrassment. The problem does seem to me sufficiently somber so that in the interest of everyone you no less than the rest of us the circumstances should be clearly known. In this spirit I raise the following questions:

  1. Could you indicate the nature of Data Resources, Inc? I have reference to assets, sales, employees, services rendered, identity of corporate clients and charges.
  2. I believe it can fairly be assumed from general knowledge that the Corporation owes part of its prestige and esteem to association with members of the Harvard Department of Economics. The foregoing being so and reputation being a common property of the Department and Harvard University, could I ask as to your ownership or other interest or other participation of whatever sort and return?
  3. Has the Corporation employed students and nontenured members of the Department of Economics and would you indicate the names?
  4. Could I ask if you have participated in the past in the consideration of Harvard promotion of any such employees, consultants or people otherwise associated with the Corporation and in what cases?
  5. Could past service or inferior service or present or potential utility to the Corporation or extraneous judgment based on business as distinct from academic performance create, again perhaps subjectively, the possibility of a conflict of interest in your passing on Harvard promotions? How have you handled this conflict in the cases in which people with an association, past or present, with the Corporation have been up for Harvard promotion, always assuming that there have been such cases?
  6. In the recruiting of clients for the Corporation, what of the danger that they will be affected by the close relation between the Corporation and the Department? Specifically could there be effort, however subjective, to quell their fears? The radical economists come obviously to mind. But, as you are perhaps aware, even I am not a totally reassuring figure to many businessmen department with too many people of my viewpoint might also evoke alarm. Does safety here suggest that one with major corporate interest disqualify himself on all appointments?
  7. Is there a possibility — I by no means press the point that the kind of economics that serves corporate interest will take on an exaggerated importance when some of our ablest faculty members, and students are working on such problems?

Let me repeat that I ask these questions only for a clarification in which we share a common interest. I do not of course raise the more general question of outside activity. This would come with very poor grace from me — it is indeed the reason why I have sought not to be a charge on university resources,

Yours faithfully,

John Kenneth Galbraith

CC: Professor James S. Duesenberry

Dean John T. Dunlop

JKG:mih

_____________________________

Eckstein provides his answers to Galbraith’s “interesting questions”

Otto Eckstein
24 Barberry Road
Lexington, Mass. 02173
January 8, 1973

Professor J. Kenneth Galbraith
Department of Economics
Harvard University
207 Littauer Center
Cambridge, Mass. 02138

Dear Ken:

Pursuing the habits of a lifetime, you raise interesting questions in your letter of December 20th. Let me answer them by giving you an account of the origins and development of Data Resources, Inc., and of its relations to Harvard. I believe this will respond to all of your questions.

(1) Origins of DRI

As you know, my professional career has largely been devoted to the application of the techniques of economics to actual problems of the U.S. economy. After my most recent period of full -time government service in 1966, my views on the economy were sought by business and financial organizations. I quickly discovered that they made little use of macro economics or econometrics. The gap between macro and micro was unbridged. They typically ignored the overall situation. Econometrics, which always looked to me to be a very practical way to establish quantitative relationships, received little use and remained an academic plaything. I had already discovered in the government that even macro-decisions were made on the basis of very crude quantitative work, without the benefit of the thirty years of methodological development of econometrics.

In mid-1967, I had the idea that the technology of the time-sharing computer provided the missing link that would make it possible to use the modern techniques to improve private and public planning on a day-to-day basis. The time-sharing technology had the potential of overcoming the mechanical hurdles of programming, data punching, batch runs, etc. which had made econometrics a slow process open only to economists of exceptional mechanical aptitude. The time-sharing technology had the potential of bringing high quality data bases to researchers of providing them with the programs that would allow them to develop individual equations and to combine these equations into simulation models, and to evaluate their “satellite” models for historical analysis, contingency analysis and micro-forecasting. Such satellite models might encompass revenues and costs of their own industries or products, the detailed composition of unemployment, regional incomes, and the tax collections of governments.

These satellite models are constructed by users, at their own remote locations, combining their own data with the national data banks on the central computers. The programs allow the construction of the models and their on-line linkage to the centrally managed national models. Once the models are built, the particular company or government can quantitatively assess its own demand, costs, production, etc., assuming a particular macro-situation. It can see its own revenue and cost outlook assuming the central forecast, or alternatively what would happen if the economy should do better or worse. The micro-implications of changes in fiscal or monetary policy are also made apparent.

Besides making the tools that are our main stock-in-trade widely useable in the actual economy, the existence of such a system could accomplish these goals:

(1) There would be a rationally decentralized structure of information flows. The national data banks would be large and accessible, but local private information would remain where it belonged — in the confidential hands of the local analysts best equipped to use it.

(2) Analysis itself would be rationally decentralized. National forecasting could be done centrally with the use of lots of resources and with the benefit of an enormous data base and model collection. Micro forecasting would be done by the user organization itself.

(3) Micro-analysis would consider macro-environments as quantitative inputs. If the macro-forecasts are better than the crude assumptions previously made, the errors in micro-decisions should be reduced.

(4) As a result, the stability of the economy should be enhanced. There should be fewer and smaller mistakes in private and public economic decisions. Some of the benefits of indicative planning are realized without the political risks.

Once the basic ideas were clear, how was it to be done? The obvious possibilities were (1) a foundation financed project at Harvard; (2) persuade the government to undertake this work; (3) go to a large company  such as a computer manufacturer or bank; or (4) organize a new, small private enterprise. After some reflection, I decided that the new, small private enterprise form was the only suitable one. A Harvard project was ruled out immediately because of the poor experience with the Harvard Economic Barometers of the late 1920’s, an episode with which I was familiar from reading the archives of The Review of Economics and Statistics. Also, the system would require considerable operating staff for the computers, data banking, service and marketing. A university is not a good employer for such a staff nor a good working environment for these functions. I knew from my government experience that such a project was beyond the capacities of public agencies, at least in the United States, and budget stringency would have made federal funding unlikely, The large company would have posed difficult personal and political questions. Further, I felt that if the scheme were successful — and I had a good deal of faith in it — it could grow and reach its full potential by generating its own revenues. Finally, the idea of ultimately supporting my family from my main activities rather than “moonlighting” was attractive.

In 1968, Mitchell, Hutchins and Company, an investment firm with whom I was consulting, found the venture capital, an amount in seven figures. Donald Marron, its President, and I then co-founded DRI. The largest fraction of the capital was provided by First Security Corporation, an asset management group under the leadership of Mr. Robert Denison, a summa graduate of Harvard College and the Business School. The Board of Directors of the company are Mr. Marron, Mr. Denison, myself, and Mr. Stanton Armour, the Chairman of the Operating Committee of Mitchell, Hutchins.

The project required managers, econometricians, programmers, and computer experts. Mitchell, Hutchins managed the organization of the company, provided the initial business background and management, recruited personnel, etc. Dr. Charles Warden, previously special assistant to several chairmen of the CEA joined the company and took on many of its managerial burdens. Later on the company was organized into three divisions, each headed by a Vice-President.

Given the complexity and ambition of the scheme, I recognized that I needed the collaboration of the very best econometricians in terms of ideas, review and quality control. Mr. Marron and I, therefore, put together a founding consulting group, consisting of Jorgenson, Nerlove, Fromm, Feldstein, Hall and Thurow. This group made major contributions in the design stage. Today, the academic consultants mainly direct policy studies that DRI has been asked to undertake by government agencies and foundations. At all stages, the largest part of the work of developing and operating the DRI system and forecast was done by full-time professional employees of the company.

To help assure the widest application of the new techniques and to be able to offer alternative model forecasts, DRI entered into an agreement with the Wharton model group directed by Lawrence Klein. We continue to collaborate with them, and the Wharton model and its forecasts are maintained on the DRI computers. Subsequently, we have entered into arrangements with the model building group at the University of Toronto and with Nikkei, the sponsors of the Japan Economic Research Center.

As for the distribution of ownership, about half of the equity is in the hands of the institutions who provided the capital. Professional employees have ownership or options on another substantial fraction of shares, and my children and I own about a fifth of the shares. The academic consulting group has about 5% of the shares, received at the time of the founding of the company. All of the stock is restricted; it is not registered with the SEC and hence not saleable. The academic consultants are paid on a per diem basis as they actually spend time. In order to give the company a better start, I did not take any pay in the first three years; last year I began to receive a modest compensation.

(2) The Status of DRI Today

On the whole, my hopes and aspirations for DRI have been realized The economic data bases are the most comprehensive in existence and their accuracy is unquestioned. The econometric models have advanced that art in certain respects. The forecasts have been good and are now followed and reported quite widely. The people — management, research economists, service consultants, data processing and programming experts, and marketing — are capable and the organization is strong. While it inevitably takes time for new concepts and techniques to gain acceptance and be widely adopted, more than half of the fifty largest industrial companies and a large fraction of the financial institutions utilize the DRI system. Every major government agency involved in macro economic policy as well as every major data producing government agency is a user of the DRI system. The research environment created by the DRI data banks, software, models and computers has proved so attractive that even organizations with considerable internal facilities find it useful to have access. DRI as an organization has no political views, though individuals associated with the company can take any position they wish.

Our system has also been used by ten universities and colleges and we have just begun to develop special services for the state governments. As DRI is becoming better known and our communications network to our computers spreads to cover a far greater number of communities, we expect that more colleges and universities will find it possible to take advantage of these research facilities.

The company reached the break-even point in the twentieth month of operation after expending the larger part of the venture capital to create the initial version of the DRI system. It is now moderately profitable and earnings are advancing rapidly. Thus far, the capitalists have earned no return of dividends or interest. They have been extraordinarily forbearing in not pressing for quick returns, preferring to let the company use all of the resources in these early years to bring the DRI concept to full fruition. The probabilities are good that the investors will be handsomely rewarded over the next few years. Having taken the risk and waited, they will have earned their return.

(3) The Relation of DRI to Harvard University

Recognizing the sensitivity of this issue from the beginning, I have made sure that Data Resources produced a flow of benefits to Harvard and that Harvard would not provide resources to DRI. The Board of Directors, heavy with Harvard alumni, formally instructed me early in our development to provide free use of the DRI system to Harvard students. Quite a few have done so, including students on my small NSF project on prices and wages. This Fall, for the first time, I have a graduate working seminar in econometric model building. Each of the seven students enrolled is building his own model, simulating it, and writing a paper. The projects include the first econometric model of Ghana, a small scale two-country model of Canada and the United States, an exercise in policy optimization using the DRI model, a study to use macro models to estimate the changing distribution of income, a study of tax incidence using translog production functions, and a model of Venezuela. If this experimental seminar is successful, a lot more can be done, of course.

In terms of relations with professors, Feldstein and Jorgenson were members of the original academic consulting group, along with professors at MIT, Chicago, Brookings and Wharton. I direct and take responsibility for the DRI forecasts, working with full -time employees. The others have focussed on policy studies, including three major studies for the Joint Economic Committee which received considerable attention. They have also done studies for the U.S. Treasury, the Ford Foundation, etc. These studies have not been a significant source of profit to the company, but they surely help to build Data Resources as an authoritative source of economic analysis and serve the public interest.

DRI has had very limited relations with the non-tenured faculty in the Harvard Economics Department. We cooperated with the Department in January 1969 to make it possible for Barry Bosworth to assume his appointment a semester early when he wished to leave the Council of Economic Advisers. He did some useful research that spring and summer, most of which reached fruition in his subsequent papers at The Brookings Institution. His half-time support was transferred to a project at Harvard after one semester. Mel Fuss collaborated in the early stages of our analysis of automobile demand sponsored by General Motors. Bill Raduchel has done some consulting in the programming area with us, but this was always was a very minor part of his activities. While it would be improper to recount the precise role of myself or Feldstein and Jorgenson in the promotion considerations of these three men, it is perfectly obvious and easily documented that there is no substantive historical issue of DRI considerations entering into Harvard appointments. Bosworth went to Brookings before his appointment came up; Fuss and Raduchel were not promoted.

Perhaps this is the point to digress on my philosophy on Harvard promotions. I believe that assistant professors should be selected on the basis of professional promise, their potential contribution to the undergraduate teaching program and whatever publication record they already possess. Promotion to associate professor should mainly be based on research accomplishments as well as teaching performance, with both prerequisites. I have always strongly felt that collaboration in the research projects of senior professors should be given no weight in non-tenured appointments because of the considerable risk that the Harvard appointment thereby becomes a recruiting device for the personnel of these projects. In my years at Harvard, I have never asked the Department to appoint anyone whose presence would be useful to me, and I never will make such a request. To the best of my knowledge, Feldstein and Jorgenson have pursued the same policy. I recommend adoption of procedures that would assure that all of us avoid such appointments.

There are more intangible relations between DRI and Harvard which are hard to assess and easy to exaggerate. If I did not possess a professional reputation which has been enhanced by my professorship here my career would have been different, and I might not have received my extraordinary opportunities of public service. As far as the development of DRI is concerned, my greatest institutional indebtedness is to the Council of Economic Advisers. It was this experience which made me appreciate the importance of accurate and quick information and of the tremendous potential of using econometrics to bridge the gap between macro- and micro-economics. As far as the relations with our private and public clients are concerned, a sophisticated group containing numerous Harvard graduates, they understand perfectly well the tremendous diversity of people and ideas present at Harvard. They know that Harvard has no institutional position on political questions or on the merits or demerits of the existing social, political or economic system. It is also clear to them that Data Resources is a totally distinct entity. I am not responsible for your views and you will not be tainted by mine.

Your final question, whether “the kind of economics that serves corporate interest will take on an exaggerated importance when some of our ablest faculty members and students are working on such problems” is a deep philosophical one which I can only attempt to answer in this way. The Harvard Economics Department has always contained individuals with widely varying concepts of their role in life and preferences in their professional activities. Compared to its historical position, the Department at this time is exceptionally heavy in abstract theory and methodology, and in social philosophy and criticism of the existing order. I represent a different point of view that has always been common in our department. It is my aim to apply economics to the country’s problems in the belief that the existing system can be made to meet the needs of the good society. The development of Data Resources is my current personal expression of this philosophy.

Sincerely yours
[signed] Otto
Otto Eckstein

OE/gc

_____________________________

Feldstein reports being a satisfied user of DRI services

HARVARD UNIVERSITY

MARTIN S. FELDSTEIN
Professor of Economics

1737 CAMBRIDGE STREET, 617
CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS 02128

January 9, 1973

Professor J. K. Galbraith
Department of Economics
Harvard University
Littauer 207

Dear Ken:

Although I was surprised by your letter, I am happy to describe my relations with Data Resources. I have been an “economic consultant” to DRI since it was organized. I would describe both the amount of work that I have done and my financial interest as very limited. Last year, my only DRI work was a study of the problem of unemployment that I did for the Congressional Joint Economic Committee. The Committee contracted with DRI for the study. DRI provided the use of the DRI model and data bank and the special computing facilities. Professor Robert Hall of MIT, another DRI consultant, worked on the study for a few days. The study, Lowering the Permanent Rate of Unemployment, was used as the background for hearings in October and will be published by the Committee this year. I am enclosing a copy for your interest. I might also note that although the work on this for DRI is now complete, I am planning to continue on my own to do research on some of the problems that I examined in this study. A graduate student who helped me during the summer became so interested in some of the questions of labor force participation that he is considering doing his thesis on that subject.

Before last year I worked on developing the financial sector of the Data Resources model. The basic work here was building a bridge between the usual Keynesian analysis and the Fisherian theory with its emphasis on the expected rate of inflation. My work here started as direct collaboration with Otto Eckstein; we published a joint paper, “The Fundamental Determinants of the Interest Rate,” in the 1970 Review of Economics and Statistics. This research led me to consider the importance of expected inflation in all studies of the impact of interest rates; I described my work on this in “Inflation, Specification Bias, and the Impact of Interest Rates” (Journal of Political Economy, 1970). Although further work on the financial sector is now done primarily by members of the DRI full-time staff, I did some work in 1971 on extending the analysis of expectations and testing alternative econometric models of expectations. This work is described in a recent paper, “Multimarket Expectations and the Rate of Interest” with Gary Chamberlain, that has been submitted for publication.

I have described my DRI studies in such detail to give you a sense of both the substance and nature of the work. It has been scientific research on substantively and technically interesting questions of macroeconomics and macroeconomic policy. I have also found the access to the DRI facilities, particularly the macroeconomic model system and data bank, to be useful in my other research and teaching.

I cannot believe that my association with DRI could create any of the problems that you indicate in your questions 5, 6 and 7. I believe that Otto is writing to you about the specific points that you raised about DRI in your questions 1 through 4. I hope that all of this material reassures you about the relations between DRI and members of our department.

Please call me if you have any further questions,

Sincerely,
[signed] Marty
Martin S. Feldstein

MSF:JT

Enclosure

_____________________________

Galbraith to Feldstein: You did not address my concern about “problems of conflict of interest”

January 19, 1973

Professor Martin S. Feldstein
Room 617
1737 Cambridge Street

Dear Marty:

Many thanks for your detailed — and good-humored — response. I’m grateful also for the JEC Study of which Otto spoke and which I am taking to Europe for my own reading. I have taken the liberty of giving a copy of your letter to Ed Mason who, as you perhaps know, is making a study of this whole problem.

As you can guess, I am untroubled by work done directly or through DRI for the government. I am concerned about the problems of conflict of interest that seem to me to arise when a corporation which owes its esteem to members of our Department markets profit-making services to other corporations. But this is something on which I should like to reserve comment until Ed Mason has come up with his conclusions.

Yours faithfully,

John Kenneth Galbraith

JKG:mjh

_____________________________

Jorgenson: I think you are barking up the wrong tree

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS

January 22, 1973

DALE W. JORGENSON
Professor of Economics

1737 CAMBRIDGE STREET, ROOM 510
CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS 02138
(617) 495-4661

Temporary Address until 6/30/73:
Department of Economics
Stanford University
Stanford, California 94305

Professor John Kenneth Galbraith
Littauer 207
Harvard University
Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138

Dear Ken:

Many thanks for your letter of December 20 and your note of December 21. Let me take this occasion to thank you for the copy of your AEA Presidential Address you sent to members of the Department. It was a masterpiece of the genre and will be long remembered by its readers. I am very sorry that I was unable to attend your oral presentation at Toronto.

I share your deep concern over recent actions of the Department of Economics on non-tenure personnel, even though our views on these matters do not always coincide. In view of the strong feelings involved I found the discussion to be remarkably free of personal considerations. I hope that I have not been a party to what you describe as a less than gracious response to vour own views. If I have, I hope that you will accept my apologies.

Since your letter is addressed to Otto Eckstein, Martin Feldstein and myself, I will limit this response to my own role in DRI. I am a stockholder and consultant to DRI and have been for almost four years. In my work for DRI, I have acted as a consultant to several U.S. government agencies and to the Ford Foundation. I have had only one corporate client for my services. My main current activity for DRI is a study of energy policy for the Ford Foundation.

DRI provides a unique environment for certain types of research in applied econometrics. My current work on energy policy would be infeasible without the DRI system. The computer software, computerized data bank, and econometric forecasting system have been indispensable in modeling the energy sector and in studying the effects of economic policies related to energy. The facilities available at DRI have reduced the burden of data processing and computation for econometric model-building by several orders of magnitude.

To my mind the two most important features of the DRI system are its high quality from the scientific point of view and its ability to assimilate the results of research and to make them available for routine application. The data bank is unparalleled in scope and reliability and is constantly expanding as new sources of data are made available. The computer software package is highly sophisticated and is under continuous development as new econometric methods are designed. The forecasting system is the core of DRI’s operations and has undergone a process of improvement and extension that has continued up to the present.

The performance of the DRI system is the main source of attraction for DRI’s clients. This is certainly the case for my study of energy policy. You raise a general question about the concerns of DRI’s clients and the views of members of Harvard’s Department of Economics. In my experience there is no connection, either positive or negative. The clients of DRI are buying the services of DRI. As I have already indicated, this is a rather unusual product, unavailable at any university economics department, including Harvard’s.

On the issue of non-tenured members of the Department of Economics who are also employee-consultants of DRI, I have not employed any non-tenured members of the Department in my work for DRI, as I indicated in our telephone conversation. I find it difficult to envision circumstances in which any conflict of interest related to junior appointments could arise from my DRI association. There have been no such circumstances in the past.

I hope that these observations help to clarify the issues you raise

Yours sincerely,
[signed] Dale
Dale W. Jorgenson

DWJ: cg

cc: E. Mason, J. Dunlop, H. Rosovsky, R. Caves, J. Duesenberry, O. Eckstein, M. Feldstein

_____________________________

Galbraith back to Jorgenson: we need to avoid even the appearance of a  “conflict of interest”

Gstaad. Switzerland
February 13, 1973

Professor Dale W. Jorgenson
Department of Economies
Stanford University
Stanford, California 94305

Dear Dale:

Many thanks for your letter and for your nice comments. I hope life goes well for you at Stanford. I am writing this from Switzerland where I am on the final pages of what I intend shall be my last major effort on economics. When I get tired I propel myself across the snow and think how good the mountains in the winter would be in a world where one did not feel obliged to take exercise.

I must say that my attention after writing was shifted to yet another of our corporations of which, to my annoyance, I was unaware. It functions currently, I gather, as a subsidiary of the antitrust problems of IBM.

I do feel that there are serious problems here. Participation in the management of the Department, especially in the selection and recruitment of personnel, and in the management of a profit-making enterprise are bound to involve if not the reality of conflict of interest then the appearance of conflict. Appointments, it will be held, are influenced by what influences corporate customers or needs. This must be avoided. It is especially clear if the corporation sells such services as antitrust defense. But it is also the case if the corporation becomes large and successful —, as I would judge, DRI is certain and deservedly to be.

The proper course, as I have suggested to Ed Mason and informally to Otto, is not to deny any professor the right to participation in a profit-making enterprise. Rather it is to separate the two management roles. A man should be free to have an active ownership role in a corporation or an active position in Department management. He should not do both. This would obviate problems of conflict or seeming conflict and protect the positions of all concerned. Needless to say, I would have the same rule apply to all.

Yours faithfully,

John Kenneth Galbraith

JKG:mjh

cc: E. Mason, J. Duesenberry, O. Eckstein, M. Feldstein, R. Caves, H. Rosovsky, F. Ford

_____________________________

“Economics Dept. Reports On Faculty’s Outside Ties”
by Fran R. Schumer. Harvard Crimson, March 20, 1973

A committee in the Economics Department reported yesterday that business connections between Economics professors and outside corporations do not interfere with hiring decisions and teaching practices.

James S. Duesenberry, chairman of the three-man committee, said yesterday that business ties do not impose a conservative bias on the Department’s hiring practices and do not limit the faculty’s teaching time.

Complaints

The committee’s investigation was prompted by complaints raised last term by John Kenneth Galbraith, Warburg Professor of Economics.

Galbraith attributed the Department’s “conservative hiring practices” to faculty members’ ties with business firms. “The fact that the Department sells its services to American business firms biases its administrative decisions,” Galbraith said.

Despite the committee’s negative findings, Otto Eckstein, professor of Economics and president of Data Resources Inc., a consulting firm, has requested to go on half-time status at Harvard, effective September 1.

Eckstein said yesterday that his decision resulted from Galbraith’s complaints and a new rule prohibiting professors from spending more than one day a week consulting. The rule, previously implicit, was formally written into University law this year.

Galbraith voiced objections to faculty members’ business ties several weeks after the Department’s decision last December not to rehire two radical economists.

At that time, Galbraith told Duesenberry that “business ties necessarily impair the faculty’s ability to impartially judge economists, especially radical economists.”

Galbraith also complained that the Department’s decision last December not to promote William J. Raduchel, assistant professor of Economics, was based on the quality of Raduchel’s work for an outside Resources had little influence on the consulting firm and not on his research and teaching abilities in the Department.

Raduchel is a consultant for Data Resources Inc. and is also a sectionman for Galbraith’s course, Social Science 134, “The Modern Society.”

The committee, composed of Duesenberry, Arthur Smithies, Ropes Professor of Political Economy, and Richard E. Caves, Stone Professor of International Trade, reported last January that Raduchel’s work for Data Resources had no influence on the Department’s decision.

The committee also reported that outside ties do not prejudice the Department’s hiring decisions and do not interfere with normal administrative functioning.

The committee reported its findings only to Duesenberry, the chairman of the Economics Department. Committee members refused to comment on how they investigated the problem.

Duesenberry attributed Galbraith’s objections to the Department’s decision not to promote Raduchel. “Galbraith is annoyed because his boy didn’t get promoted,” he said.

Raduchel told The Crimson last month that he was satisfied with the Department’s decision not to promote him. He said that the decision had “nothing to do with my connection to Data Resources, and was based on my academic work.”

Eckstein agreed with Duesenberry’s conclusion that Raduchel’s work at Data Resources had little influence on the Department’s decision.

Explaining his own position at Data Resources Inc. Eckstein said that his case is no different than that of other faculty members who do consulting work.

Currently, at least three senior faculty members and one junior faculty members do consulting work at Data Resources.

Eckstein described consulting work an inevitable product of Harvard’s hiring policies. “Harvard naturally attracts people who get involved in the outside world,” he explained.

He said that he has a “clear conscience” about the work he is doing at Harvard.

_____________________________

Galbraith to Chairman Duesenberry:

Gstaad, Switzerland
March 27, 1973

Professor James S. Duesenberry
Littauer M-8

Dear Jim:

Herewith some good-humored thoughts on our final talk the other day about our corporate affiliates. As you request, I will now leave the problem to the President, Steiner and whomever.

  1. Although both you and Henry Rosovsky had earlier expressed discomfort about our corporation and some action now seems in prospect, you say I’m severely viewed for raising the issue. Isn’t this a little hard? The important thing, I suggest, is to get things right. However, although given my sensitive soul it has been difficult, I have steeled myself over the years to the idea of not being universally loved.
  2. You say that the bias from combining business entrepreneurship with professorial activities in the eye of some of our colleagues is not greater than that deriving from my (or Marc Roberts’) support of George McGovern. I somehow doubt that the faculty would agree. There is indication of difference, I think, in the way one reacts. I do not find myself shrinking especially from identification even with anything now so widely condemned as the McGovern campaign. I detect a certain desire to avoid public discussion of our corporations.
  3. In keeping with the desire for reticence, I told Ed Mason I wouldn’t talk with the press. The Crimson tells me that you have explained that I raised the issue only out of pique over the non-promotion of Raduchel. Isn’t this a bit one-sided? However, beyond denying any such deeply unworthy motive, I’ll stick to my agreement, always reserving the right of self-defense.
  4. As to my motives, so far as I can judge them, I did feel that Raduchel got judged on his corporate work, while — as Smithies and I both complained — there was no consultation with those who best knew about his teaching. His teaching has been very good. I suggest that we are always in favor of improving undergraduate teaching in principle but not in practice. Also I do not agree that he was unpromotable. He has a lively, resourceful mind and has worked hard for the University and the students. I think him far, far better than the dull technicians we do carry to the top of our nontenured ranks, possibly even beyond.
  5. But, as I probe my soul for the purest available motive, it was not Raduchel. I simply think that, when a professor speaks or acts on a promotion, we should know that he is doing it as a professor and not as a businessman.
  6. I had thought that the separation of our business arrangements from the Department management might be a solution, with the proposed withdrawal of voting rights from the aged as a precedent. This, I gather, will not wash, so I subside. As Ed Mason tactfully hints, I’ve had enough lost causes for one year.

I do have one final thought. In accordance with the well-known tendencies of free enterprise at this level, one day one of these corporations is going to go down with a ghastly smash. It will then be found, in its days of desperation or before, to have engaged in some very greasy legal operations. The Department and the University will be held by the papers to have a contingent liability. It will be hard to preserve reticence then. It would have been better to have taken preventative action now.

Conforming to your wish that I restrict communications on this subject, I’m not circulating this letter. But would it trouble you If I added it discreetly to the file in the President’s office? Do let me know.

Yours faithfully,

John Kenneth Galbraith

JKG:mjh

Source: John F. Kennedy Presidential Library. John Kenneth Galbraith Personal Papers. Series 5 Harvard University File, 1949-1990. Box 526. Folder “Harvard Dept. of Economics. Discussion of appointments, outside interests and reorganization, 1972-1973 (1 of 2)”.

Image Sources: John Kenneth Galbraith (1978), Harvard University Archives; Otto Eckstein (April 1969), Harvard University Archives; Martin Feldstein (ca. 1974), Newton Free Library, Digital Commonwealth, Massachusetts Collections Online; Dale Jorgenson. (1968). John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation.

Categories
Carnegie Institute of Technology Columbia Curriculum M.I.T. Pennsylvania

Pennsylvania. Memos from Ando and Dhrymes to the curriculum committee, 1965

 

The significance for the history of economics of the following three memos is that they provide an illustration of the diffusion (infiltration?) of the M.I.T. canon to other departments. Albert Ando taught a few years at M.I.T. before coming to Penn and Phoebus Dhrymes (M.I.T., Ph.D., 1961) wrote his dissertation under Kuh and Solow.  The memos were sent to the curriculum committee of the department of economics at the University of Pennsylvania in January 1965 (at least the Ando memo is dated January 14, 1965 and it explicitly refers to the Phoebus memo and their recommendations to the Mathematics Committee that are undated).

Obituaries for both Ando and Dhrymes have been added to this post and precede the three memos.

Economics in the Rear-view Mirror thanks Juan C. A. Acosta who found these memos in the Lawrence Klein Papers at the Duke University Economists’ Papers Project and has graciously shared them for transcription here. 

Addition to post: At Banca d’Italia, N. 7 – Albert Ando: a bibliography of his writings.

_______________________________

Albert Keinosuke Ando
1929-2002
Obituary

Dr. Albert Ando, professor of economics, SAS and professor of finance, Wharton, died on September 19 [2002] at the age of 72.

Dr. Ando was born in Tokyo, Japan in 1929 and came to the United States after World War II. He received his B.S. in economics from the University of Seattle in 1951, his M.A. in economics from St. Louis University in 1953, and an M.S. in economics in 1956 and a Ph.D. in mathematical economics in 1959 from Carnegie Institute of Technology (now Carnegie Mellon University). Dr. Ando came to Penn in 1963 as an associate professor of economics and finance and became professor of economics and finance in 1967. He held this position until his death.

Dr. Lawrence Klein, Nobel laureate in economics and professor emeritus of economics wrote the following about his colleague.

After World War II many Japanese scholars visited the United States for general education and to modernize their training in some key subjects. Albert Ando, Professor of Economics and Finance, who died of Leukemia last week was an early arrival in the 1940s. He was educated at Seattle and St. Louis Universities and often expressed gratitude at the career start provided by his Jesuit teachers in an adopted country.

He completed the doctoral program in mathematical economics at the Carnegie Institute of Technology, where he was strongly influenced by Herbert Simon with whom he collaborated in research papers on aggregation and causation in economic systems. He also worked closely with another (Nobel Laureate to be) Franco Modigliani on the life cycle analysis of saving, spending, and income.

Dr. Ando was on the faculties of the Carnegie and of the Massachusetts Institutes of Technology before moving to the University of Pennsylvania, where he remained since 1963. He had visiting appointments at universities in Louvain, Bonn, and Stockholm. He consulted with the International Monetary Fund, the Federal Reserve Board, The Bank of Italy, and the Economic Planning Agency of Japan. He held many positions as an editor of scholarly journals and wrote numerous articles and books.

The main contributions of Professor Ando were in econometrics (theory and applications), monetary analysis, demographic aspects of household economic behavior, economic growth, and economic stabilization. His work on the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, University of Pennsylvania, and Social Science Research Council (MPS) model was of great benefit for the research department of the Federal Reserve Board, and his more recent work on econometrics for the Bank of Italy had been very fruitful.

He served as chairman of the graduate group in the economics department, 1986-1989, and developed excellent working relationships with many advanced students. He set very high standards, and those he worked with as thesis supervisor benefited greatly. He was extremely loyal and dedicated to their work, maintaining close connection with them after they departed from the University.

During his long and fruitful career, he earned many honors–as Fellow of the Econometric Society, as a Ford Foundation Faculty Research Fellow; as a Guggenheim Fellow, and a Japan Foundation Fellow. He was given the Alexander von Humboldt Award for Senior American Scientists.

Albert Ando is survived by his wife of 35 years, Faith H. Ando, two professorial sons, Matthew and Clifford, and a daughter, Alison, who has just been admitted to the New York Bar. His mother, sister, and brother, live in Japan.

–Lawrence Klein, Professor Emeritus of Economics

Source: University of Pennsylvania. Almanac. Vol. 49, No. 6, October 1, 2002.

_______________________________

Phoebus James Dhrymes
(1932-2016)

Phoebus J. Dhrymes (1932-2016), the Edwin W. Rickert Professor Emeritus of Economics, was a Cypriot American econometrician who made substantial methodological contributions to econometric theory.  Born in the Republic of Cyprus in 1932, Phoebus Dhrymes arrived in the United States in 1951, settling with relatives in New York City. After a few months, he volunteered to be drafted into the US Army for a two-year tour of duty; afterwards he attended the University of Texas at Austin on the GI Bill. In 1961 he earned his Ph.D. from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology under the supervision of Edwin Kuh and Robert Solow (Nobel Laureate 1987).  After a year-long post-doctoral fellowship at Stanford, he began his professorial career at Harvard, then moved to the University of Pennsylvania, and then UCLA.  In1973 he joined the Department of Economics at Columbia University; he was named the Edwin W. Rickert Professor of Economics in 2003 and retired in 2013.

Econometrics refers to that aspect of the economist’s work concerned with quantifying and testing economic trends. Phoebus Dhrymes‘early research focused on problems of production and investment, but he soon turned to more methodological work and produced important results on time series and on simultaneous equations.  Throughout his career, Phoebus Dhrymes placed much emphasis on the dissemination of scientific knowledge. In the early 1970s he helped found the Journal of Econometrics, which has become the leading journal in this field.  He was also on the advisory board of the Econometric Theory, and was managing editor and editor of the International Economic Review.He was a fellow of the Econometric Society and the American Statistical Association.Dr. Dhrymes was also one of the founders of the University of Cyprus, from which he was later awarded an honorary degree.

He wrote a series of influential textbooks including Distributed Lags:  Problems of Estimation and Formulation. This work was translated into Russian and published by the Academy of Sciences of the Soviet Union, and in the 1970s Dr. Dhrymes was invited to visit the (now former) Soviet Union, specifically Moscow and Novosibirsk. At the time such visits were unusual events for westerners, requiring rarely-issued visas and security clearances, particularly for centers of research such as Novosibirsk.

In a 1999 interview he characterized his books as “filters that distill and synthesize the wisdom of many contributors to the subject.   On this score, I was influenced in my writing by the way I learn when studying by myself.”  (Econometric Theory, 18, 2002)

Dr. Dhrymes is survived by his daughter, Alexis, and his sons, Phoebus and Philip. In his personal life, he was regarded as a generous, kind and gentle man, always there for his family. He came from humble beginnings, and garnered great respect from his family and friends for his achievements. He spoke often of how much he enjoyed teaching. He was always available to his students.He encouraged individualized thinking and understanding of processes rather than rote memorization in learning. He had a warm and affable demeanor, recalled fondly by former students and family members. He will be sadly missed.

Source: Obituary for Phoebus J. Dhrymes at the Columbia University Department of Economics Website.

_______________________________

Memorandum

To: Herbert Levine, Chairman, Curriculum Committee
From: Albert Ando
Subject: Offerings and Requirements in Macroeconomics, Monetary Theory, and Related areas in General Economics Ph.D. Program

  1. Macroeconomics

Enclosed herein is a copy of the outline and references of Economics 621 [The outline and references will be posted later] as I am offering it this fall. It is fairly similar to [the] one year course in macroeconomics which is required of all Ph.D. students at MIT. I am sure that opinions would vary on details, but it is my view that this represents more or less the topics and literature that all Ph.D. students in economics should be familiar with. Ideally, I think there should be another major topic at the end of the outline dealing with current problems and policies.

It is fairly clear that this outline could not be covered in one term, particularly under our present system in which there are only 13 to 14 weeks of classes for a term. As a matter of fact, this fall, with a great deal of rushing throughout the term, I will be able to finish the static part of the outline by the end of the fall term, but certainly no further.

This suggests that the required macroeconomics for Ph.D. students should be two term sequence of courses, the first term dealing essentially with the Keynesian static analysis, and the second term with dynamics, i.e., business cycles and growth models.

  1. Monetary Economics

I have just discovered that Economics 622 is taught without any prerequisite, and that there will be some students in 622 who have not had any macroeconomic theory this spring. I am somewhat stunned, and do not see how I will be able to teach a satisfactory course under the circumstances. This situation is indicated by the fact that 622 is required not only of Ph.D. students in economics but also of master’s candidates, and therefore it is apparently impossible to exclude the students from 622 who have not had 621. An obvious temporary solution is to make those students who have not had 621 wait until next year to take 622. In my view, elements of monetary problems should be included in the first term of the required macroeconomics course, and courses in monetary theory should be made elective. The course in monetary theory should then be taught assuming that students have had adequate preparation in macroeconomics and microeconomics, particularly the theory of general equilibrium, at the level where we can discuss the research and developments in the past dozen years or so, bringing students up to a point where they can draw a thesis topic from their work in the course. There is a room for an argument that there should be another course in addition to the advanced theory course, which deals with more traditional money and banking material. As a matter of fact, I offered two courses in monetary economics at MIT for several years, one dealing with traditional money and banking material taking the one term each of macro and micro economics as prerequisites, and another highly theoretical and advanced course taking two terms each of macro [and] micro economics as prerequisites. It seems to me, however, that Economics 639, Monetary Problems and Policies, should serve as the good traditional money and banking course, so that only one additional course seems to be needed.

  1. Microeconomics and Mathematics

After some discussion with Dhrymes, it is fairly clear that microeconomics should also be taught as a two term sequence. A possible division between two terms would be to deal with partial equilibrium analysis of consumers and firms during the first term, and with the general equilibrium analysis and welfare economics in the second term.

During this fall term, Dhrymes and I found it necessary to conduct a few special remedial sessions in mathematics so that some rudimentary notions of calculus and linear transformation will be available in the discussions in theory courses. The idea, of course, is to arrange so that all students are equipped with minimum of mathematics by the beginning of the second term. If the recommendation of the committee on mathematics is adopted, so that students will learn elementary calculus and the matrices and linear transformation, including rudiments of linear differences and differential equations at the level suggested by the committee it is possible to synchronize it with theory courses so that theory courses will be using only those mathematics students are learning in mathematics remedial courses. For instance, the first term of macro theory would not require too much mathematics except the notion of the systems of equations and their solutions, and the first term of micro theory not much more than the condition of extremum in a fairly informal manner. In the second term, on the other hand, theory courses will require conditions of stability in the general equilibrium analysis, and the difference and differential equations in dynamic models in macroeconomics.

  1. Overall First year program and Second year fields of specialization.

In addition to micro and macro theories and mathematics required for these theory courses, students should be asked to learn minimum of statistics and econometrics. The level of statistics and econometrics should be maintained at the level of text books such as Frazer, Brunk, or Mood plus Johnston.

The implication of the above statement is that the course schedule for typical first year Ph.D. students should look as follows:

First term:

Microeconomics I (Partial equilibrium analysis)
Macroeconomics I (Static Keynesian analysis, including some monetary considerations).
Mathematics I (Elementary calculus)*
Mathematics II (Elementary Linear Algebra)*
Economic History (For those with Adequate mathematical training)

*For the suggested content of mathematics courses, see recommendations of Mathematics Committee.

Second Term:

Microeconomics II (General equilibrium analysis and welfare economics).
Macroeconomics II (Dynamics, business cycles and growth)
Econometrics (6 hour course)

This schedule, of course, would be subject to variations depending on the background and preparations of students. For instance, students who already have sufficient mathematical training might be encouraged to take a course in economic history and a course in somewhat more advanced mathematics, such as mathematical theory of probability or a course in topology in the first term in place of Mathematics I and II.

_______________________________

Lists of Topics for Mathematics for Economists
[Recommendations of Ando and Dhrymes submitted to the Mathematics Committee]

(Mr. Balinski is to suggest some alternative text books)

  1. Calculus
    1. Sets and Functions.
      1. Definitions
      2. Operations on Sets and Subsets.
      3. Relations, Functions.
        K.M.S.T. Chapter 2, Sections 1 through 6, possibly Sections 10 through 13.
    2. Functions, Limits, and Continuity.
    3. Differentiation and Integration of Functions of one variable.
      1. Concepts and Mechanics.
      2. Infinite series and Taylor’s Theories.
      3. Extremum Problems.
    4. Differentiation and Integration of Functions of many variables.
      1. Concepts and mechanics.
      2. Extremum problems, nonconstrained and constrained.
      3. Implicit Function Theorem.
        Any elementary text book in Calculus (e.g. Thomas; Sherwood and Taylor), Supplemented by some sections of a slightly more advanced text on Implicit Function Theorem and La Grange multipliers.
  2. Linear Algebra and others.
    1. Vector Spaces and Matrices.
      1. Vector Spaces and Matrices, Definitions, and Motivations.
        Perlis, Chapters 1 and 2.
      2. Linear Transformations.
        K.M.S.T., Chapter 4, Sections 7 through 12.
      3. Equivalence, Rank, and Inverse.
        Perlis, Chapter 3.
        Perlis, Chapter 4.
      4. Quadratic Forms, Positive Definite and semi-definite Matrices.
        Perlis, Chapter 5, Sections 1, 2, and 5
      5. Characteristic Vectors and Roots.
        Perlis, Chapter 8, Sections 1 and w[?], Chapter 9, Sections 1, 2, 5, and 6.
      6. Difference and Differential Equations; Linear with Constant Coefficients.
        Goldberg, Chapters 1, w, e, and Chapter 4, Sections 1 and 5; Perlis, Chapter 7, Section 10. Some reference to two dimensional phase diagram analysis of non-linear differential equations with 2 variables. Lotke?
      7. Convex Sets.
        K.M.S.T., Chapter 5.

_______________________________

MEMORANDUM
January 14, 1965

To: Curriculum Committee
From: Phoebus J. Dhrymes
Subject: Mathematics, Microeconomics, Statistics and Econometrics in the Economics Graduate Training Program

  1. Mathematics

It has become quite apparent to me during the course of the last term that our students are woefully equipped to handle instruction involving even very modest and elementary mathematics.

I think it is quite generally accepted that a student specializing in Theory, Econometrics and to a lesser extent International Trade and Industrial Organization would find it increasingly difficult to operate as a professional economist, and indeed seriously handicapped in satisfactorily carrying on a graduate study progress, without adequate mathematical training. With this in mind Albert Ando and I have prepared a tentative list of topics that graduate students ought be minimally familiar with and which has been presented to the Mathematics Committee.

This could form a remedial (and a bit beyond) course to extend over a year and to be taken (by requirement or suggestion) by students intending to specialize in the fields mentioned above during their first year of residence.

  1. Microeconomics

It has been my experience in teaching Econ. 620 that one semester is a rather brief period for covering the range of microeconomic theory a graduate student in Pennsylvania ought to be exposed to. As it is the case at both Harvard and MIT, I would propose that the course Econ. 620 be extended to a year course. Roughly speaking, the topics to be covered might be:

  1. Theory of Consumer Behavior
    1. the Hicksian version
    2. the von Neumann-Morgenstern version, including the Friedman-Savage paper
  2. Demand functions, elasticities, etc.
  3. Theory of the firm; output and price determination
    1. Production functions
    2. Cost functions and their relations to i.
    3. Revenue and profit functions and the profit maximizing hypothesis
    4. The perfectly competitive firm and industry, and their equilibrium; comparative statics; supply functions
    5. The monopolistic firm
    6. Monopolistic competition
    7. Duopoly and oligopoly
  4. Factor employment equilibrium
    1. Factor demand functions
    2. Factor employment equilibrium under various market institutional arrangements
    3. Some income distribution theory
    4. Factor supply.
  5. General Equilibrium Analysis; Input-Output models
  6. Welfare Economics (Samuelson; Graaf)
  7. Capital Theory (Fisher, Wicksell, recent contributions)
  8. (Marginally) Some revealed preference theory; or neoclassical growth models; or alternative theories of the firm (e.g., Cyert and Marsh)

It would be desirable if students were sufficiently well-equipped mathematically to handle these topics at some level intermediate between Friedman’s Price Theory Text and Henderson and Quandt; however, since this is not the case at present some other alternative must be found, such as in the manner in which the propose mathematics course is taught, and the order in which topics above are covered. The split of the subjects could be a) through c) or d) for the first semester and the remainder for the second semester. Clearly, neither the topics proposed nor the split represent my immutable opinion and there is considerable room for discussion.

  1. Statistics

At present the statistical training of our students suffers from their inadequate mathematical preparations.

It is my opinion that minimally we should require of our students that they be familiar with the elementary notions of statistical inference, estimation, testing of hypotheses and regression analysis at the level of, say, Hoel, or Mood and Graybill, or any other similar text, (a semester course). For students intending to specialize in Econometrics or other heavily quantitative fields, then it should be highly desirable that a year course be available, say at the level of Mood and Graybill, Graybill, or Fraser, Hogg and Craig, Brunk, etc., with suitable supplementary material. Since, we do have access to a statistics department it might be desirable for our students to take a suitable course there.

Again, due to the problems posed by the mathematics deficiency of incoming students, some accommodation must be reached on this score as well.

  1. Econometrics

Econometrics should not be a required subject; rather the requirement—minimal requisite—should be confined to the one semester course indicated under III. It would be desirable to offer a year course to be taken after the statistics sequence and which would cover at the level of, say, Klein, Goldberger, or my readings showing applications and problems connected thereto.

Topics, could start by reviewing the general linear model, Aitken estimators and similar related topics; simultaneous equation and identification problems, k-class estimators, 3SLS, maximum likelihood estimation, full and limited information, Monte Carlo methods.

Also selected topics from Multivariate Analysis; specification analysis, error in variable problems; elements of stochastic processes theory and spectral and cross spectra analysis.

It might be desirable to teach these subjects in the order cited above, although it would appear preferable to have multivariate analysis precede the review of the general linear model.

  1. General Comments:

I generally agree with Albert Ando’s memorandum on proposed curriculum revision in so far as they pertain to Mathematics requirements, Macro-economics and Monetary Theory.

I think that at present we require our students to take too many courses. I would favor only the following requirements; the basic Micro and Macro year courses. At least a semester of statistics, as indicated under III, and one semester in either economic history or history of economic thought—although I do not feel too strongly on the latter. I presume, in all of this that students in our program are only those ultimately aiming at specialization in Theory, Econometrics, International Trade, Industrial Organization, and possibly Comparative Systems, or Soviet Economics. It is my understanding that our curriculum will not cover those concentrating in Labor Relations, Regional Science or Economic History.

Thus, through their first year our students would be taking more or less required courses, with the second year essentially left open for their special fields of concentration.

Thus, the course program of a typical first year student will look more or less as shown in Albert Ando’s memorandum, p. 4, although I would be somewhat uneasy about requiring 6 hours of mathematics in the first term and 6 hours of statistics (econometrics) in the second term of the first year. Nonetheless I do not object strongly to this, and indeed in this past term many of the students taking 620 and 621 had in effect taken a six-hour course in Mathematics, 611 as taught by Dorothy Brady and approximately 3 hours as taught by Albert Ando and myself.

Quite clearly the above are merely proposals intended to serve as a basis for discussion an ultimately for guidance of entering students in planning their program of study rather than rigid requirements.

 

Source: Duke University, David M. Rubenstein Rare Book and Manuscript Library. Economists’ Papers Archive, Lawrence Klein Papers, Box 19, Folder “Curriculum”.

Images: Left, Albert Ando; Right, Phoebus Dhrymes. From the respective obituaries above.

Categories
Chicago Economists

Chicago. Economics Department on Possible Candidate for Permanent Employment, 1950

 

How big was the split within the department of economics in 1950 at the University of Chicago? Judging from the decision by chairman T. W. Schultz to essentially table the matter of approaching the central university administration with a candidate for a permanent position, there was a departmental deadlock.

The half-dozen economists discussed were: George Stigler, Abba Lerner, Kenneth Boulding, Leonid Hurwicz, Kenneth Arrow, and Lawrence Klein. Contemplate those names for a moment and then read aloud the following two sentences:

Several members of the Department stated that none of these men had all of the qualities sought: a good mind reaching out fruitfully in new directions in economics. It was agreed, however, that there were no likely candidates possessing these qualities in a high degree.   

We can only speculate which alpha economists happened to lock horns in those three meetings.

_________________________

From the MINUTES, Meeting of the Department,
May 24, 1950.

Present: T. W. Schultz, T. Koopmans, A. Rees, H. G. Lewis, D. G. Johnson, E. J. Hamilton, R. Burns, J. Marschak, F. H. Harbinson, F. H. Knight, M. Friedman, B. Hoselitz, L. Metzler

[…]

II. Appointments

Schultz informed the Department that Hildreth’s position has been renegotiated for a term of three years. The Department approved a motion authorizing for Hildreth the courtesy rank of Associate Professor for a three year term.

The Department then considered the appointment problem raised by the leaving of Blough (probably initially on a one year leave of absence) and Brownlee. Schultz suggested that the Department had two alternatives open to it: a temporary replacement (construed broadly) and a permanent appointment of a top ranking person.

The Department considered first possible candidates for permanent appointment. Attention centered on George Stigler, Abba Lerner, Kenneth Boulding, Leonid Hurwicz, Kenneth Arrow, and Lawrence Klein. For a temporary appointment Schultz suggested Gunnar Myrdal.

[Meeting began at 3:30 pm and ended 5:45 p.m.]

_________________________

From the MINUTES, Meeting of the Department,
May 30, 1950.

Present: T. W. Schultz, R. Burns, D. G. Johnson, E. J. Hamilton, F. H. Knight, L. Metzler, R. Blough, F. H. Harbinson, A. Rees, H. G. Lewis, T. Koopmans, J. Marschak, M. Friedman.

Appointments

The discussion of appointments continued from the previous meeting. Schultz expressed the conviction that the time was propitious for a new permanent appointment. On Metzler’s suggestion, the Department returned to discussion of the following candidates for a permanent appointment: Stigler, Hurwicz, Boulding, Klein, Lerner, Arrow.

Several members of the Department stated that none of these men had all of the qualities sought: a good mind reaching out fruitfully in new directions in economics. It was agreed, however, that there were no likely candidates possessing these qualities in a high degree.

The chairman then polled those present with respect to their first choice (or ties for first) for a permanent appointment. As a result of the poll the list of candidates was narrowed to Hurwicz, Stigler, and Lerner. The chairman then polled those present on their position toward permanent appointment of each of these men.

The poll showed that of those present

4 would favor and 5 oppose the permanent appointment of Hurwicz
4 would favor and 5 oppose the permanent appointment of Lerner
6 would favor and 6 oppose the permanent appointment of Stigler

A motion was passed instructing the chairman to poll the absent members of the Department in the same way on the appointment of Hurwicz, Lerner, and Stigler and to report back to the Department for further discussion.

[Meeting began at 3:30 pm and ended 6:15 p.m.]

_________________________

From the MINUTES, Meeting of the Department,
June 8, 1950.

Present: T. W. Schultz, H. G. Lewis, D. G. Johnson, J. Marschak, H. Kyrk, P. Thomson, M. Friedman, T. Koopmans, A. Rees, E. J. Hamilton, F. H. Knight, R. Blough.

Appointments

Schultz reported that he had polled Kyrk, Thomson, Mints, and Nef (but had not heard from Goode) on the matter of a permanent appointment for Stigler or Hurwicz or Lerner. The upshot of the poll was that the Department, the Chairman not voting, was evidently divided in its rating of Stigler for a permanent appointment; both permanent members and temporary members of the faculty showed an even division. The Chairman explained that he would abstain from voting on the belief that the Department was not now prepared to advance, with a strong meeting of minds, a strong case to the Central Administration for a permanent appointment. Schultz proposed that we investigate a slate of names for a one-year appointment.

A motion was passed authorizing the Chairman to put Gunnar Myrdal in the first position on the slate for a one-year appointment.

Successive motions passed by the Department added the following names to the slate:

Nicholas Kaldor   Simon Kuznets
Arthur F. Burns
H. M. Henderson
W. Vickrey
A. Hart
H. Stein

The Department then, following the system of ranking used in fellowship appointments, ranked these seven persons. The rank order follows:

1. Kaldor
2. Burns
3. Henderson
4. Kuznets
5½. Vickrey
5½. Hart
7. Stein

[Meeting began at 3:30 pm and ended 6:00 p.m.]

Source: University of Chicago Archives, Department of Economics Records, Box 41, Folder 12.

Image Source: Social Science Research Building.  University of Chicago Photographic Archive, apf2-07466, Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library.

 

Categories
Chicago Economists

Cowles Commission. Evsey Domar’s Four Salient Episodes, 1947-48

 

When asked by Clifford Hildreth who was working on his project, The Cowles Commission in Chicago, 1939-1955, for suggestions and/or observations from economists who had worked at Cowles during that period, Evsey Domar had few vivid recollections to offer of his year there some thirty five years earlier. Two items were associated with Jacob Marschak, one with Lawrence Klein, and one with Kenneth Arrow.

Having written the last Ph.D. dissertation supervised by Evsey Domar, I feel it my obligation to include such nuggets of Domaresque delight as his characterization of the difference between the economist (Kenneth Arrow) and the political scientist (David Easton) whom Domar had introduced to each other: “the political scientist assumed all except what he had explicitly rejected; the economist assumed only what he had explicitly stated.” 

___________________

Carbon copy of Domar letter to Hildreth

November 26, 1982

Professor Clifford Hildreth
Department of Economics
University of Minnesota
1035 Business Administration
271 19th Avenue South
Minneapolis, NM 55455

Dear Cliff:

This is in reply to your letter of October 27th regarding my impressions of the Cowles Commission.

I really have very little to say, because my connection with the Commission was short (about a year) around 1947-48, and also because I was only nominally a member of the group. I remember four episodes:

  1. Jacob Marschak asking for another dozen years or so to make economics truly scientific.
  2. Same, discussing the economics of free (atomic) energy.
  3. Larry Klein predicting such a low GNP for (I believe) 1947, that after some six months hardly anything was left for the remainder of the year.
  4. I introduced Ken Arrow and David Easton (the political scientist) to each other. it took them some time to find a mutual language. Reason: the political scientist assumed all except what he had explicitly rejected; the economist assumed only what he had explicitly stated. Perhaps this episode was the most educational of all.

Sorry I cannot help you more.

Cordially,

Evsey D. Domar

/gjk

Source: Economists’ Papers Archive, David M. Rubenstein Library, Duke University. Evsey Domar Papers, Box 4, Folder “Correspondence Hf-Hz”.

___________________

Arrow on David Easton

The exposition of the book [Social Choice and Individual Values] was developed in the next year back in Chicago. I presented the material over a number of seminars. I was grateful to these people [Tjalling Koopmans, Herbert Simon, Franco Modigliani, T.W. Anderson, and Milton Friedman] because they thought it was a good idea, encouraged me and asked good questions; parts of the book are making clear points they found obscure.

Easton was a little different. He was the first political scientist I talked to about this. He gave me the references to the idealist position which was sort of the opposite idea. In a way the idealist position was the only coherent defense that I could see in political philosophy. It wasn’t a very acceptable position, but it was the only one that had at least a coherent view of why there ought to be a social ordering.

Source:  J. S. Kelly and Kenneth J. Arrow, An Interview with Kenneth J. Arrow, Social Choice and Welfare, Vol. 4, No. 1 (1987), pp. 55-56.

Image Source: Economists’ Papers Archive, David M. Rubenstein Library, Duke University. Evsey Domar Papers, Box 18, Folder “Photographs (Domar)”.

Categories
Economists Michigan

Michigan. Organization of Behavioral Sciences. Report to Ford Foundation, 1954

Here an except from the University of Michigan’s Survey of the behavioral sciences, the fourth university of five participating in the Ford Foundation Project of 1953-54 on the behavioral sciences. Harvard, Chicago, Stanford and Michigan’s reports are in the public domain and available at hathitrust.org. I have been unable to locate the University of North Carolina’s report but perhaps some kind visitor to Economics in the Rear-View Mirror (attention colleagues at Duke!) can track that one down for us sometime. These reports provide a very nice set of artifact-bookends for my project on graduate economics education in the United States that I truncate around mid-twentieth century. Link to Michigan’s Economics-Pantheon here.

___________________________________

[p. 11]

THE ORGANIZATION OF
BEHAVIORAL SCIENCE ACTIVITIES

At the University of Michigan there is no general administration of Behavioral Science or of Social Science as such. The teaching activities of the University are organized in a College of Literature Science and the Arts, a Graduate School, and 13 professional schools. Research and special services are carried on in each of the teaching units, and also in special bureaus, institutes and centers which are authorized for particular continuing operations and which, depending on their scope, may report to a department, a school, or to the central university administration.

Since 1934 there has been a Division of the Social Sciences1, comprised of representatives from the relevant departments and schools. Its function is primarily advisory and it has no budget or administrative responsibility. The General Committee of the Division nominates a Research Committee which advises the Board of the Graduate School on allocations for research projects in the field of social science.

The administrative units concerned with the Behavioral Sciences are described in the following sections:

1) Departments of the College of Literature, Science and the Arts
2) Professional Schools
3) Institutes and Research Agencies.

[p. 12]

DEPARTMENTS OF THE COLLEGE
OF LITERATURE, SCIENCE AND THE ARTS
 

Anthropology

The present organization of the Department of Anthropology, in a sense a transitional one, involves a staff of 15 members of whom five hold full-time teaching appointments in the Department of Anthropology and five hold full-time appointments in the Museum of Anthropology. Of the other five, two hold joint appointments with the Department of Sociology, one with the Department of Near Eastern Studies, one with the Institute of Human Biology, and one with the English Department. These complicated administrative arrangements are the result of a long-standing and well established tradition of separation of Museum and Department, and a general overlap of research interests with other disciplines.

In 1939 the Department had a staff of three men, one of whom devoted most of his time to his duties as Director of the Museum of Anthropology and of the University Museums, while the others taught full-time. It offered an undergraduate major and an A. M. degree. Museum staff members, not including the Museum Director, were three men who devoted themselves to research and curatorial work, their chief contact with students being consultation on research topics involving Museum collections. Owing to war absences in 1944-45, the Museum staff members were called upon to participate in the regular teaching program of the Department, and shortly thereafter this practice was formalized by granting them professorial titles, although no change was made in budgetary arrangements. This growth of departmental resources made possible a considerably expanded curriculum, and it was decided to press for further expansion of staff with a view to establishing a full-fledged doctoral program. This goal was achieved in 1948.

Joint appointments, particularly in the specialized fields of social organization, culture and personality, and linguistics, materially aided the rapid staff expansion. A fairly well rounded representation of the various areas of special interest within anthropology has resulted, although the staff and administrative structure are by no means thought to have attained any final or ideal form. The development of smoothly functioning working arrangements among the units involved in anthropology is an important problem; presumably these arrangements will evolve [p. 13] in response to problem situations as they arise. No difficulties have as yet come up which are insoluble under the present organization.

Research in anthropology at Michigan reflects several currents of influence. Traditional, individual research in descriptive ethnography and culture theory is well represented by the work of White and Titiev, and in prehistoric archaeology by the Museum staff; Beardsley, Schorger, and others participate in area interdisciplinary team research through such programs as those of the Center for Japanese Studies and the Department of Near Eastern Studies; and topical research interest in the problems of kinship and social organization is represented by Aberle and Miner. There does not appear to be any strong “official” emphasis along any of these lines from the standpoint of the insider, but the outside image of Michigan research is probably still influenced by the pre-expansion situation when the archaeological work of the relatively large Museum staff was especially visible.

No well defined trend is now evident, and it seems likely that Michigan anthropological research will be as difficult to characterize sharply in ten years as it is now. Presumably the archaeological research collections of the Museum will continue to be exploited, the dominant interest of the Michigan physical anthropologists in population genetics will persist, and the various area programs will continue to operate.

 

Economics

The Department of Economics has been in the forefront of the post war development of economics in two principal and interrelated directions, increased attention to economics as part of the study of human behavior as a whole, and greater emphasis on quantitative economics and econometrics.

Five members of its staff of 17 hold joint appointments with other departments and institutes, and 10 teaching fellows and predoctoral instructors are engaged in elementary course teaching.

Student enrollment consists of about 127 undergraduate concentrates and 62 graduate students of whom about two-thirds are working at the doctoral level.

The fields of economics in which research is being carried on are:

Economic Theory: Ackley, Boulding, Dickinson, Katona, Morgan, Palmer, Suits
[p. 14]
Money and Banking: Musgrave, Watkins
Labor: Haber, Levinson
International Economics: Remer, Stolper
Public Control and Regulation: Peterson, Sharfman
Public Finance: Ford, Musgrave
Quantitative Economics, Statistics and Research Methods: Katona, Klein, Suits
Economic History: Dickinson
Interdepartmental, Interdisciplinary, Area Programs, etc.: Ackley, Boulding, Remer, Stolper, Suits

The trend at Michigan to relate the study of economics to human behavior as a whole and thus to integrate it with the problems and results of other disciplines is shown in many activities of its staff. Of particular interest is the work of George Katona on the psychological foundations of economic behavior, and Kenneth Boulding’s explorations into problems in the integration of the social sciences. Members of the economics staff participate in the interdisciplinary seminars in the Japanese, Near Eastern and Latin American area programs, and in the Metropolitan Community Seminar and the Seminar on Land Utilization.

Considerable emphasis is placed upon quantitative economics and econometrics. The number of courses in this field has been increased from the two courses in economic statistics formerly available, to include a semester’s work in mathematical economics, now required of all doctoral candidates, a year’s work in econometrics under Klein, a semester of research methods under Katona, and a continuing research seminar in quantitative economics. In addition, an increasing amount of quantitative research is being carried on in the substantive seminars. Particularly notable are the recent studies in the incidence of taxation carried out by Musgrave in his seminar on Fiscal Policy, and studies of interregional development directed by Stolper.

The location of the Survey Research Center here has greatly encouraged and facilitated the development in these two directions by providing personnel, materials and additional methodology for the conduct of quantitative research. It has stimulated graduate student interest in these problems through participation in research and in many cases through employment. The annual appointment of two post doctoral visiting economists as research associates of the Center, broadening the area over which ideas are interchanged, was made possible by Carnegie Corporation funds.

[p. 15] The Interdisciplinary Program in Mathematics and the Social Sciences and the Detroit Area Study, both established under the 1950 Ford Foundation grant, have made important contributions to mutual understanding of problems by mathematicians and social scientists. The Detroit program makes an annual sample survey of the population in that area, providing training for graduate students as well as a research facility for faculty members.

These developments have had a natural effect on the interests and work of graduate students. Five students at the doctoral level are now employed by the Survey Research Center as study directors. Five others are engaged as half-time research assistants in the research seminar in quantitative economics. One student is engaged in an independent sample survey project growing out of the interregional studies mentioned above, and two students are pursuing independent research utilizing data obtained from the Survey of Consumer Finances conducted annually for the Federal Reserve Board by the Center.

Quantitative research by graduate students is limited by two factors. In the first place, the costs involved in processing quantitative data in any volume discourage such activity except where the expenses can be met by the research institute, program or seminar in which the student is participating. No free departmental funds are available for this purpose.

Secondly, the department itself has not yet overcome the “cultural lag” between its encouragement of quantitative research on the one hand and its formal doctoral program on the other. Traditionally the department has placed primary emphasis on theory rather than research. The student has been required to familiarize himself with economic theory and the institutional background of economic activity. Introductory courses in statistics and accounting have long been required as research “tools” for graduate students, but although further study has always been encouraged, no formal place in the graduate curriculum has been provided for it. The members of the Economics faculty are well aware of this contradiction and it is expected that it will be resolved in the near future.

 

Political Science2

[p. 16] Although lectures in political science were given as early as 1860 (by members of the law faculty) and courses in political institutions were found in the history department from 1870 on, a political science department as such was not established until 1910. An abortive “Institute of Political Science” had been established in 1887, but administrative difficulties caused it to disappear from the scene in a few years.

The department gradually grew in size until its faculty by 1933 numbered 12. In the post war days this number doubled, and there are now 24 members on the department staff. In the early days the department expanded by adding new courses in public law, political theory, municipal government and administration, and foreign governments. The work in public administration increased gradually from 1914, when a special curriculum was organized, until 1937 when an Institute of Public and Social Administration was created, which in turn led to a separate Institute of Public Administration in 1945. From the mid-thirties on the department has expanded primarily by the addition of staff in the fields of international relations and politics.

Today there are 1887 student enrollments in a total of 43 courses. There are 71 graduate students, and 176 undergraduate concentrates. Fifteen graduate students are in the process of writing dissertations.

The department divides its program into the following six fields of specialization: American government and constitutional law, foreign governments, political parties and public opinion, political theory, public administration, international law and relations. The staff is divided unequally in these fields, reflecting the demands of undergraduate and graduate instruction. The largest number of courses in the department, according to a recent report of its Curriculum Committee, are of the institutional-descriptive type (about 40). The political theory courses follow the traditional pattern of chronological analysis of great ideas. Two methodology courses are given each for one semester only: Scope and Method of Political Science, and Bibliography and Methods of Research. A growing interest in political behavior is indicated by three courses in this area and by the use of behavioral methods and materials in other courses.

The content and method of doctoral dissertations reflects an orientation of staff and courses toward institutional-descriptive materials. Of the 56 dissertations completed since 1947 or now being written, about one-half are legal-structural studies in American national, state or local government. Another 10 [p. 17] are in the international field, with half of them in international law. Six are traditional political theory studies. Eight can be classified strictly as behavioral and these have been written in the last two or three years.

The department has several interdisciplinary linkages, both formal and informal. Four members of its staff are involved in the Japanese Research Center, the Russian Studies Program, the Latin-American Program, and the Near Eastern Studies Program. The department regularly participates in the Metropolitan Community Seminar and the Land Use Seminar. By invitation of the government and the University of the Philippines, and supported by a government contract, it organized and operates a Public Administration Training Center in Manila. It has set up special courses in conjunction with the schools of Public Health, Forestry, and Education. Its linkages with Sociology are close on occasion. The Institute of Public Administration has had a sociologist on its staff for the past year. Political science staff and graduate students were on the staff of the Detroit Area Study during two of the three years it has been going on. The Political Behavior Program has granted a research assistantship to a Sociology graduate student for the past two years. The Phoenix Project in the Institute of Public Administration, includes a sociologist as well as economists on its staff.

The most significant behavioral developments in the department, especially from a student-training standpoint, are the Political Behavior Research Program inaugurated in 1950 with Ford funds, and the Phoenix project in public administration and legislative aspects of atomic energy control. Currently several members of the department are planning a collaborative program of research on the representative process. A program of behavioral research and training is thus seen to have a substantial and promising start. It will develop by the addition of staff members in this area and by the inclusion of more research training for graduate students, in proportion as the demonstrated achievement of the current activities earn departmental support and succeed in gaining financial support.

 

Psychology3

A major development in the Department of Psychology was undertaken in the years following 1946. Prior to the war the [p. 18] department had been small, with primary emphasis in experimental work. Walter Pillsbury retired as chairman in 1943 and during the war there was greatly restricted activity. After the war, with the establishment of a training program in clinical psychology, and with the expansion in social research, the staff was trebled and the graduate program greatly broadened.

The staff now consists of 55 members, only a few of whom are appointed full time on the teaching budget. The sum of their fractional teaching appointments is 24. The other parts of their appointments are in the Institute for Social Research, on research grants, and in clinical agencies.

The main directions of activity in graduate research and training may be conveniently considered as three; clinical, social, and general experimental. There is a certain amount of administrative separation of the three, and the students tend to group in these categories, but a deliberate effort has been made to integrate their work. Four-fifths of the work of the first graduate year is common for all students; specialization begins in the second year; after prelims many of the seminars again find all kinds of students together.

There are about 110 graduate students working toward the doctoral degree in Psychology. The number is arbitrarily limited by the admission of not more than 25 or 30 graduate students each year. They are selected from 200 or more qualified applicants. Admissions are planned so that there will be about the same number of students in clinical, social and general. Only two or three a year drop out for personal or academic reasons. The Department undertakes to find half-time positions for practically all students in research, teaching or clinical work which will contribute to their training. There are 30 appointments in the Veterans Administration, 5 to 8 in other clinical agencies, 5 on United States Public Health Service stipends, about 20 in teaching, and 10-20 on research projects. Ordinarily two students hold University fellowships and two to nine hold outside fellowships. The capricious inflexibility of this system is obvious, and it is frequently impossible to provide the job most appropriate for the student’s level and direction of training.

Active research programs are carried on in the following fields, usually with some assistance from outside grants:

Visual psychophysics: Blackwell, Kristofferson
Physiological: McCleary, Smith
Learning: Walker, Birch
[p. 19]
Motivation: Atkinson, Clark
Perception: Brown
Therapy: Bordin, Raush, Hutt, Segal
Counseling and Psychodynamics: Blum, Miller, McNeil, Allinsmith
Personality Assessment: Kelly
Mathematical Methods: Coombs, Milholland, Hays
Attitude Change: Katz, Newcomb, Peak, Rosenberg
Teaching Process: McKeachie
Industrial Human Relations: Maier
Others in Institute for Social Research

Laboratory and practicum facilities, in addition to the I.S.R., include the well equipped Vision Research Laboratory, a 10- room animal research laboratory, and a 10-room experimental laboratory in addition to a 10-room teaching laboratory, all in Mason Hall. A three-room machine and wood shop is fully equipped. In the Bureau of Psychological Services is a Psychological Clinic directed by Frederick Wyatt, and a Student Counseling Service directed by Edward Bordin, both extensively used for training. Hospital facilities are favorable for training in Pediatrics, less so in Psychiatry.

One of the continuing objectives of the Department of Psychology is to realize a reasonable balance of strengths. Before the war the emphasis was almost exclusively on laboratory experimental work. With the advent of the Veterans Administration program in 1946 the emphasis became heavily clinical. The establishment in 1948 of the Institute for Social Research created an immediate emphasis in social psychology. Only in the last year or two has general experimental psychology been strengthened by new appointments, new laboratories, and outside research grants to the point where reasonable balance has been attained.

 

Sociology

Courses in sociology have been taught at Michigan for about 60 years. During half of that period the leading figure was Charles Horton Cooley, an outstanding exponent of the psychological approach to the analysis of social life. In 1930, after Cooley’s death, sociology became a separate department, under the leadership of Roderick D. McKenzie. McKenzie’s interest in human ecology was a counterfoil to the Cooley tradition. Both approaches, developed through the years, are reflected in the current work of the department.

[p. 20] The major areas of research and graduate training concern four fields: Social Organization, Human Ecology and Population, Social Psychology, and Methodology. A series of substantive courses and seminars are offered in each of these areas. Some of the principal research areas in which graduate and faculty research go on within each of these general fields are as follows:

Social Organization

Social Stratification: Landecker, Lenski, Swanson
Political Sociology: Janowitz, Campbell
Social Integration: Angell
Industrial Sociology: Carr
Comparative Community Structure: Miner
Family and Kinship: Aberle, Blood
International Social Organization: Angell and Landecker
Collective Behavior: Swanson, Aberle
The Urban Community: Hawley, Janowitz, Freedman
Religious Institutions: Lenski
The Dynamics of Small Groups: Lippitt, Swanson

Population and Human Ecology

Population Distribution: Hawley, Kish
Fertility Trends: Freedman
Migration: Freedman, Hawley

Social Psychology (see next section of report)

Methodology

Survey Research Techniques: Likert, Campbell, Kish
Group Dynamics Methodology: Lippitt
General Quantitative Methodology: Williams

The department has major responsibilities in undergraduate teaching. In the fall semester of 1953 there were 1708 course elections in sociology. Most of the undergraduate elections are in introductory courses. In the fall of 1953 there were 60 undergraduate concentrates in sociology and 24 concentrates in pre-professional social work. There were approximately 50 graduate students.

Many ties with other University units are maintained. Two staff members have joint appointments in anthropology; three have joint appointments in psychology; and four are on the staff of the Institute for Social Research. Twelve of the 24 graduate courses offered for credit during the current semester are also listed by at least one other department.

[p. 21] There has been considerable revision in the graduate curriculum during the post-war period. Outstanding trends have been increasing emphasis on (1) systematic theory, oriented to the empirical testing of hypotheses and (2) training in and utilization of new methodological developments for empirical work. Illustrative of the first trend is a seminar in Theories of Social Organization required of all doctoral candidates. Illustrative of the second trend is the required participation in the Detroit Area Study of all first year graduate students.

At the present time approximately one-third of all graduate students have their primary orientation in the field of Human Ecology and Population; the remaining two-thirds in Social Organization. Students whose major orientation is in Social Psychology generally enter the special doctoral program in that field. The department now has rather large groups of students trained for work in these three fields.

Continuing research programs involving students and faculty in these areas compose the chief development needs felt at the present time.4 These needs are reflected in part in the proposal for a social organization research program, presented elsewhere in this report. The Department assigns the highest priority to the continuation of the Detroit Area Study as a central focus for its training of first year graduate students.

Work in the area of Social Psychology is carried on mainly through the special doctoral program in Social Psychology and is described in the next section of the report. The Sociology Department makes a special contribution to this program in its emphasis on the relationship between aspects of social organization and psychological variables. Illustrative of this contribution are courses in mass communication, personality and culture, and collective behavior. Eight members of the department do teaching directly related to the social psychology program.

 

Doctoral Program in Social Psychology

In 1947 the Departments of Psychology and Sociology, wishing to avoid overlapping and competition in the field of common interest, and hoping to provide better advanced training jointly than either could provide alone, were authorized by the Graduate School to create the jointly sponsored Doctoral Program in Social Psychology. Its policies are determined by an Executive [p. 22] Committee appointed by the Dean of the Graduate School from the faculties of the two departments. The chairman, Theodore Newcomb, holds a professorship in each department.

The Program has its own requirements for admission, for courses of study and examination, and recommends candidates for the Ph.D. degree. It has no teaching staff of its own and there is no formal faculty status labeled “Social Psychology.” Instruction is provided by staff members from the Sociology and Psychology Departments. There are about 20 staff members holding graduate faculty status in one or both of the two departments who regard social psychology as their primary specialization and who give instruction in this area. Several of these people hold full-time teaching appointments; most of the rest hold primary appointments in the Institute for Social Research, characteristically teaching a one-semester course each year.

Because social psychology draws heavily upon both sociology and psychology, early specialization is discouraged. Admission to the Social Psychology Program presupposes at least one year of graduate work in one of the two “parent” fields. Certain advanced theory courses in the field which was not the student’s previous specialty are required in the program. Another important way in which students are kept in close touch with the parent fields is through the preliminary examinations; two of the four which are required in Social Psychology (Personality, Social Organization) are the same as those taken in Psychology and Sociology respectively.

Curricular requirements include a series of units in theory (mostly in small seminars), one year of advanced statistics, and three methods courses, two of which involve active experience in gathering and analyzing data. A paid assistantship, most commonly in research, less often in teaching, is found for every student for at least one of his years in the Program. Many of these are provided by the Institute for Social Research.

Only about ten students are admitted to the Program each year, roughly half from each of the two parent fields, out of a much larger number who apply. Very few of them have been Michigan undergraduates, but about half have begun their graduate study here. One advantage of selecting among applicants who have already completed a year of graduate work is that mortality is very small. The nine or ten Ph.D’s granted each year make this Program the fourth largest in the University.

Of the 35 persons who completed their degrees during the Program’s first four years, more than half now hold full-time or part-time research positions; the next largest number (about [p. 23] one-quarter) have academic teaching positions. There has been no greater difficulty in finding suitable positions for these people — perhaps less — than for Ph.D’s in Psychology or Sociology.

 

PROFESSIONAL SCHOOLS

The University’s constituent schools have strength and considerable autonomy. In addition to the College of Literature, Science, and the Arts and the Horace H. Rackham School of Graduate Studies there are 13 professional schools: Architecture and Design, Business Administration5, Dentistry, Education, Engineering, Law, Medicine, Music, Natural Resources6, Pharmacy, Public Health and Social Work. The Deans of the various schools meet together at the Deans’ Conference—an important agency in the formation of overall University policies. The major part of this report is concerned with activities centered in the College of Literature, Science and the Arts and in the School of Graduate Studies. However, every professional school in the University also has certain activities with a behavioral science aspect. A special study of these activities is reported in Chapter X.

 

INSTITUTES AND RESEARCH AGENCIES

Institute for Social Research7

The Institute for Social Research, consisting of the Survey Research Center and the Research Center for Group Dynamics, [p. 24] was established by Regents’ action in 1948. It is organized on a University-wide basis, administratively independent of the teaching departments and schools, but closely allied with many of them through research, teaching, and professional interests. The Board of Regents specified that “the Institute shall be under the direction of a Director (Dr. Rensis Likert) appointed by the Board of Regents on recommendation by the President and assisted by an Executive Committee.” It provided further that “the Executive Committee shall be responsible for the determination of general policies regarding the nature and scope of the activities of the Institute…” In keeping with the broad relevance of the Institute’s activities, members of the Executive Committee have been drawn from various schools of the University.

From the time of its establishment the Institute has conceived its objective as having four main aspects: (1) the conduct of fundamental research on a variety of problems of both practical and theoretical significance, (2) the dissemination of research results in ways that maximize the usefulness of the research to other scientists and to the public at large, (3) the development of behavioral science through the training of research people and the provision of assistance and consultation to researchers at Michigan and elsewhere, and (4) the development of improved methods for social research.

The Institute conducts a broad program of quantitative research on economic and political behavior, social organization and leadership, group functioning, human relations, the process of planned and unplanned change, and the effects of group membership on individual motivation and adjustment. The research undertaken employs recently developed techniques of sampling, interviewing, quantification of verbal materials, observation and quantification of group functioning, and the experimental control and manipulation of variables determining the phenomena under investigation.

The Institute contributes to graduate training through participation in formal teaching and by providing opportunities for graduate students to take part in ongoing research projects. During the year 1953-54 eighteen members of the Institute staff held joint appointments with seven teaching departments or schools, and taught twenty-five courses. Ordinarily about forty graduate students hold appointments in the Institute, and many of these complete doctoral dissertations in conjunction with this employment.

[p. 25] The research of the Institute is administered within the two major Centers in a number of program areas under the supervision of senior professional staff members. This senior staff consists, in the Survey Research Center, of Angus Campbell, Director, and Charles F. Cannell, Robert L. Kahn, George Katona, Leslie Kish, and Stephen Withey. In the Research Center for Group Dynamics it is composed of Dorwin Cartwright, Director, and John R. P. French, Jr., Ronald Lippitt, and Alvin Zander. The regular staff of the Institute consists of about fifty research scientists, a central clerical and administrative staff of about sixty persons, and a staff of part-time field interviewers located throughout the country numbering over two hundred.

The major portion of the Institute’s financial support comes through research contracts with governmental agencies, private business firms, and professional organizations/ and through grants from research supporting foundations. The Institute during recent years has operated on a budget of approximately $800,000 per year.

 

Institute of Human Biology8

The Institute of Human Biology is a research unit of the University devoted to “the discovery of those fundamental principles of biology which may be of importance for man and the application of biological principles to human affairs.” It is supported in part by general funds of the University and in part by grants from outside sources. Its regular scientific staff of 16, supplemented by 12 other research associates or collaborators, is organized around specific research projects as research teams.

Certain Institute projects have directly significant implications for behavioral science. The Heredity Clinic functions as an outpatient clinic for the University Hospital, giving advice to referred patients on medical problems of hereditary origin and conducting research on the genetics of various defects. The Community Dynamics section conducts ecological studies with particular emphasis on communities in which man is a conspicuous member. The Assortative Mating Study is investigating the effects on the heredity of a city population which may be produced by the tendency of persons with similar traits to marry [p. 26] more or less frequently than would be expected by chance. The Hereditary Abilities Study is an elaborate investigation of human heredity using the method of comparison of identical twin, fraternal twin, and sibling pairs on a large number of psychological, bio-chemical and anthropometric variables.

 

Institute for Human Adjustment

The Institute for Human Adjustment was established by Regents’ action in 1937, its purpose being “to discover means of applying the findings of science to problems of human behavior, to train professional workers, to disseminate new information and techniques among professional workers, and as far as staff, funds, and selection of problems permit, to perform distinct social services. The actual program of the Institute is carried out through five operating units, each administratively responsible to Dean Ralph Sawyer of the Graduate School who serves also as Director of the Institute.

(1) The Division of Gerontology, Wilma Donahue, Director, engages in research in the psychosocial aspects of aging; offers educational programs for older adults in conjunction with communities, business, and industry; assists in the training of professional and volunteer workers through institutes, workshops, conferences, and publications; and serves as a consultation and information center about the problems of aging.

(2) The Fresh Air Camp, Edward Slezak, Director, provides courses in sociology, education and social work, experience in organizing group programs with children, and opportunity for systematic, supervised observation of child behavior.

(3) The Social Science Research Project, Amos Hawley, Director, is a facility for giving students of the social sciences actual field experience in research. The laboratory is the metropolitan community of Flint.

(4) The Speech Clinic, Harlan Bloomer, Director, provides opportunity for the observation, diagnosis, and treatment of all types of speech disorders, for experience in the rehabilitation of persons with hearing loss, and for research in speech pathology.

(5) The Bureau of Psychological Services, E. Lowell Kelly, Director, carries out its program through four divisions as follows:

[p. 27]
(a) Evaluation and Examining (E. J. Furst, Chief) is responsible for all university testing programs and through consultation is of service to individual staff members as well as schools and departments in improving programs of student evaluation.

(b) Student Counseling (E. S. Bordin, Chief) is designed to help students in solving their problems of educational, vocational and social adjustment.

(c) Reading Improvement (Donald Smith, Chief) provides noncredit training in reading speed and comprehension.

(d) Psychological Clinic (Frederick Wyatt, Chief) serves the general public and is especially interested in the early identification and treatment of psychological problems in the family.

Most of the units of the Institute are affiliated directly or indirectly with one or more of the teaching units of the University, and have planned their programs to contribute to the training of specialists in the fields of human adjustment as well as to provide services to individuals. Financial support for the several programs is derived from endowments of the Horace H. and Mary A. Rackham Funds, from general funds, private contributions and fees for services. In general, the funds available from these combined sources are not sufficient to provide any substantial research support in addition to the service and training functions.

 

Museums

One unit of the University Museums, the Museum of Anthropology, is concerned with social science. It is administratively distinct from the Department of Anthropology, although its curatorial staff hold academic appointments and ranks in the Department and teach two or three courses each year.

The scientific staff of the Museum consists of a director and three curators who are responsible for the collections of the Museum and who conduct research in addition to their teaching. They act only in an advisory capacity with regard to the exhibits of the Museum which are installed and maintained by a special department. The research activities of the Museum curators are in the fields of archaeology and ethnobotany and hence do not fall within a strict definition of behavioral science.

Two series of publications are issued by the Museum; any topic within the general field of anthropology is acceptable for these publications and several members of the Department staff [p. 28] have used this outlet for publications in behavioral science.9 The Museum maintains an anthropological library which is used by students and the staff of the Department.

 

The Institute of Public Administration10

The Institute of Public Administration integrates instruction, research, and service in the field of public administration. The major instructional emphasis of the Institute is its full-time graduate program for people who wish to enter the public service. The Institute also develops inservice training courses for persons already employed in public positions. Through its Bureau of Government, the Institute undertakes a governmental research program and provides technical advice and assistance on problems of local, state, and national government.

The graduate program in public administration is conceived as a training course for administrative generalists. The positions which graduates are likely to fill are those which involve staff assistance to key administrators, administrative research and procedures analysis, or personnel and fiscal management. The curriculum in public administration leads to the degree of Master of Public Administration and utilizes courses throughout the University.

The Bureau of Government is the research and public service unit of the Institute of Public Administration. One of the oldest organizations in this country devoted to governmental research, the Bureau of Government was established in 1914 as a center of information on government. Its activities now include (1) a program of research on governmental problems, (2) bulletins and pamphlets based on research findings, (3) an information service on public problems which may be used by any citizen or governmental agency, and (4) the research training of the graduate students holding research assistantships in the Institute of Public Administration.

[p. 29] Recent research publications11 have dealt with career attitudes of the personnel of a federal agency, the use of admissions and income taxes by municipalities, and the public personnel activities of professional and technical associations. Problems outside Michigan are being examined in current research on civil-military leadership and an analysis of recent changes in state constitutions. Research now being done on Michigan problems concerns highway finance, elections, and the preparation of an assessors manual to be used by all the assessors in the state.

The Bureau is undertaking a study of “Public Administration Aspects of the Atomic Energy Program,” with a special staff of research associates and assistants, under a grant from the Michigan Memorial Phoenix Project.

The Institute of Public Administration, in cooperation with the University of the Philippines and the Foreign Operations Administration of the Federal Government, is now engaged in the operation of a new Institute in Manila, Philippine Islands. Under the terms of the agreement the initial personnel of the Philippine Institute are supplied by the University of Michigan, and the University of the Philippines will gradually assume complete direction. Financial support is provided jointly by the Foreign Operations Administration and the Philippine government.

 

Area Research and Training Programs

Area research and training programs at the University of Michigan include the Program in Far Eastern Studies, the Center for Japanese Studies, the Program in Latin American Studies, and the Department of Near Eastern Studies.

As the title indicates, the program in Near Eastern Studies is organized as a full department offering a concentration program to undergraduates and the M.A. and Ph.D. degrees to graduate students and having an independent staff and course list. Its basic program consists primarily of historical and linguistic training, but a close association with other departments is maintained and students are expected to develop skills in traditional disciplines. Interdisciplinary field training sessions in the Near East are held in alternate years under the guidance of two faculty members. These sessions last for a [p. 30] full year and are flexible in organization to permit the student to specialize in his particular interest.

The remaining area programs are staffed by members of various departments, and the listed courses are compilations from the offerings of those departments. Undergraduate concentration is permitted only in the Program in Far Eastern Studies. All three offer the M.A. degree and some students preparing for business or government service stop there; students continuing in graduate school transfer to one of the regular departments for the Ph.D. degree.

The Center for Japanese Studies12 maintains a special library on the campus, a field station at Okayama in Japan, and has an extensive publication program for the research of faculty and students.13

The activities of the area programs are by no means confined to the behavioral sciences. All have literary and historical interests, and elementary linguistic training is an important phase of the student’s training. Behavioral science is fostered however; community studies, for example are a characteristic activity, and the integrated multidisciplinary approach is well exemplified in the faculty seminar conducted in each program.

 

FACILITIES AND SERVICE AGENCIES

Statistical Services

The University has a variety of statistical facilities located in a number of different units.

A major facility is the Tabulating Service which is well equipped with IBM machines. These machines are available to those research projects having budgets adequate to meet the service charges. The bulk of the work done by Tabulating Service is for the Registrar’s Office and the Business Office. A significant portion is devoted to tabulations for the Institute for Social Research. Only a small part is for other research projects on the campus. In addition to the customary IBM equipment, the Tabulating Service has a 602A Calculating Punch which is used a great deal. In the spring of 1952 an IBM Card Programmed Electronic Calculator (CPC) was acquired on a trial [p. 31] basis, but there has been insufficient demand from contract research to meet the full costs of this relatively expensive machine.

The Statistical Research Laboratory exists for the express purpose of assisting faculty members and graduate students with their individual statistical problems. The laboratory maintains a small but fairly complete IBM installation (including a 602A Calculating Punch). Automatic desk calculators are also available. Most of this equipment may be used without charge provided the use is for pure, (unsponsored) research, such as doctoral dissertations.

Small IBM installations, consisting of little more than a punch and sorter, are located in other units of the University. Of major relevance to behavioral science research are those in the Institute for Social Research and in the School of Public Health.

High speed, large capacity automatic computing machines are available at the Willow Run Research Center. These are of both the analog and digital types. These facilities appear to be capable of handling statistical problems as complex as behavioral scientists are likely to encounter for some time. They are primarily used at the present time by those conducting research in engineering, natural sciences, and mathematics.

Recently a group of staff members closely associated with the various statistical services of the University submitted an unofficial report to the administrative authorities urging that steps be taken toward establishing a centralized facility for both training and research in all aspects of computation, and it is hoped that the development of the North Campus will include such a computation center more readily available to all interested University personnel.

 

Photographic Services

The University has an adequate and efficient Photographic Service, equipped to handle a wide variety of work in the field of photography. It is prepared to produce slides of all sizes in black and white or color, film strips, motion pictures, and prints. It does photomacography and photomicography. It also does a large volume of photo-offset work.

The Photographic Service has a photostating section which is equipped to handle many kinds of duplicating processes. Its Ozalid facilities are used extensively for reproducing transcripts and theses. Its map service may be used for photographing maps and modifying their scale.

[p. 32] These services are available at cost to anyone connected with the University. At the present time 11 people are engaged in the work of the Photographic Service.

 

Publication Facilities

The University has very limited facilities for scholarly publication. Some funds are regularly available from the University budget for publications, but only a very small portion of this sum is available to the behavioral sciences. Editorial facilities are so limited that few scholars are willing to endure the publication lag involved in obtaining editorial help. The Institute for Social Research has employed a full-time editor to facilitate its own publications.

The University of Michigan Press, organized in 1930, is currently undergoing study and reorganization and there is widespread hope that it will become a more significant and effective agency in Michigan scholarship.

 

The Library

The University has a large library with a competent and efficient staff. Lack of sufficient space, however, has operated to reduce the efficiency of library service. The University General Library Building is badly overcrowded. Many acquisitions of research materials cannot be made easily available because of inadequate shelves and files. Lack of space has also led to an excessive dispersion of materials in numerous special collections housed in various buildings about the campus. The groupings of materials at separate locations has not always been functional from the point of view of the behavioral scientist with an interdisciplinary interest. The University administration regards the improvement of library facilities as a first priority in general development plans, and important steps are now being taken to relieve the overcrowding by the construction of a stack building on the North Campus and of the Kresge Medical Library building.

 

Audio-Visual Education Center

The University has a well-equipped Audio-Visual Education Center, with a large collection of sixteen-millimeter sound and silent motion pictures, filmstrips, tape recordings, and art reproductions. It also is prepared to produce a variety of audio-visual materials and to provide consultation on the use of audio-visual [p. 33] materials. The staff of the Center offer graduate and undergraduate courses in audio-visual methods in the School of Education and in the Extension Service. Instructors in schools and departments on the campus may obtain materials from the Center without charge for instructional purposes. Projection service is also available without charge for any regularly scheduled University class.

 

GENERAL LEVEL OF BEHAVIORAL SCIENCE ACTIVITY

In order to bring together the relevant data about the departments the following table has been prepared. These data are for the year 1953-54. They are provided for confidential use and should not be published in any form. Figures on numbers of students and on class enrollments are particularly difficult to use in comparisons between universities because of the differences in methods of calculation.

1954_Michigan_BehSciencesTable

 

[NOTES]

 

  1. Appendix item 5; The Division of the Social Sciences: Reprinted from “The University of Michigan, An Encyclopedia Survey” Ann Arbor, Univ. Mich. Press, 1942, Vol. I, pp 304-306. Appendix item 6; List of Members, General Committee of the Division of the Social Sciences, University of Michigan, 1953-54. Appendix item 7; News Letters of the Division of Social Sciences, University of Michigan, April, 1950, June, 1952, January, 1953, May, 1953. Appendix item 8; List of Faculty Members in the Social Sciences, University of Michigan, 1953.
  2. Appendix item 9; The Department of Political Science. Reprinted from “The University of Michigan: An Encyclopedia Survey” Ann Arbor, Univ. Mich. Press, Part IV, 1944, pp 702-708.
  3. Appendix item 10; The Department of Psychology, Reprinted from “The University of Michigan: An Encyclopedia Survey” Ann Arbor, Univ. Mich. Press, Part IV, 1944, pp 708-714.
  4. Appendix item 11; Suggestions to the Dean and Executive Committee from the Department of Sociology on the Development Council Request.
  5. Appendix item 12; Publications, School of Business Administration, Bureau of Business Research, Bureau of Industrial Relations, Univ. of Michigan, 1953.
  6. Appendix item 13; Dept. of Conservation: The First Three Years (1950-1953) Univ. of Mich. School of Natural Resources. Appendix item 14; The School of Natural Resources and the Social Sciences, 1951.
  7. Appendix item 15; Institute for Social Research, Survey Research Center, Research Center for Group Dynamics, Univ. of Mich., 1952. Appendix item 16; Executive Committee and Staff of the Institute for Social Research, 1953. Appendix item 17; Publications of the Institute for Social Research, September, 1952 through November, 1953.
  8. Appendix item 18; Institute of Human Biology, Univ. of Mich. Appendix item 19; Publications, Institute of Human Biology, March 1, 1953.
  9. Culture and Agriculture by Horace M. Miner, Occasional Contributions from the Museum of Anthropology of the University of Michigan, No. 14, 1949; Araucanian Culture in Transition by Mischa Titiev, Occasional Contributions from the Museum of Anthropology of the University of Michigan, No. 15, 1951; Spanish-Guarani Relations in Early Colonial Paraguay by Elman R. Service, Anthropological Papers, Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, No. 9, 1954.
  10. Appendix item 20; Institute of Public Administration, 1954- 55 Announcement, University of Michigan, Official Publication.
  11. Appendix item 21; Publications. Bureau of Government, Institute of Public Administration, February, 1953.
  12. Appendix item 22; Center for Japanese Studies, Announcement, June 11, 1954.
  13. Appendix item 23; Publications, Center for Japanese Studies and Near Eastern Studies, 1953.

 

Source: University of Michigan. Survey of the Behavioral Sciences. Report of the Faculty Committee and Report of the Visiting Committee. Ann Arbor, Michigan: July 1, 1954.