What difference does mass production make to the design and quality of cars? Zul
Above all, it makes them much cheaper to manufacture in larger numbers and in less time. It is also more logistically “efficient,” allows more of the process to be mechanised, and achieves a more consistent result. In its now much-advanced form (using robots), it reduces the scope for human error.
The concept was perhaps first and certainly most famously developed by Henry Ford, whose business objective was to build more cars, more quickly, and at a lower price than ever before. The final quality was secondary, and ironically it engaged more humans, not fewer.
The principle mechanical component was a non-stop conveyor belt, with people and parts positioned on either side of it. Each station along the production “line” did just one thing, then their work moved along to the next station, and the next, and the next. The tasks, and the personnel, were arranged so each “job” was done in an identical amount of time.
Job one, put two pieces of metal next to each other. Job two, drill a hole through them. Job three, push a bolt through the hole and a washer and nut on the other side.
Job four tighten the nut. And so on. As the line moved along, the collection of joined-together components got larger, and by the end of the line it was a complete car.
The fact that each worker did only one thing, over and over and over again, all day and every day, was a social issue, best illustrated by a silent movie made by the comedian Charlie Chaplin.
Mr Chaplin had to tighten a single nut. Next. Again. Next. Again.
The next chap had to hit it with a hammer. Bang. Wait. Bang. Wait. Bang.
The next had to insert a piece of pipe. Stick. Wait. Stick. Wait. Stick.
The next had to put a plug the pipe. Stuff. Wait. Stuff. Wait. Stuff.
And on and on.
The system worked with robotic rhythm and absolute efficiency until Charlie got out of synch. His spanner got stuck on the nut, and so carried him with it to the next station where the job was to strike the nut with a hammer.
Predictably, the next worker hit Charlie with the hammer instead, so Charlie hit him back, only by then the conveyor had already taken him to the next work station so he hit the wrong bloke...
The pipe inserter missed his task so the plug man stuffed his cork in the wrong place. Sorry, Charlie.
To cut the story short, in minutes everybody in the factory was fighting, and the conveyor system was destroying itself. This was of course a serious social commentary, a damning indictment of the mindless Nut. Next. Nut. Next. Nut. It was also hilariously funny (to watch, not to participate in).
Like much of Chaplin's work, it was an observation that man had mastered machinery but had then become its slave; a damning indictment of the mindless, repetitive lives of production line workers.
It was also a marvellous illustration of how well a conveyor-like production process worked when it flowed, but how even the smallest interruption had disastrous domino-effect consequences.
If you haven't seen this classic movie, the next best thing is to watch Nairobi traffic - a system of interlinking conveyor belts that carry cars smoothly and efficiently to their destinations.
In the past, it didn't matter if some Charlie got his spanner stuck because there was plenty of time and room to get it sorted out before the next nut came along. Now, the conveyor belt is full, and the slightest disruption or delay at any one station throws the whole system into chaos.
Watch the traffic, any place, any time, any day, and you won't have to wait long - not just for one clutz, but for a population explosion of Charlies.
