Why Nothing Works

Why Nothing Works[1] According to a law 1attributed to the savant known only as Murphy, "if anything can go wrong, it will."2Corollaries to Murphy's Law suggest themselves as 3c1ues to the 4shoddy goods problem: If anything can break down, it will; if anything can fall apart, it will: if anything can stop running, it will. While Murphy's Law an never be wholly defeated, its effects can usually be postponed. Much of human existence consists of efforts aimed at making sure that things don't go wrong, fall part, break down, or stop running until 5a decent interval has elapsed after their manufacture. Forestalling Murphy's Law as applied to products demands intelligence, skill, and 6commitment. If these human inputs arc assisted by special quality-control instruments machines, and scientific sampling procedures 7so much the better. But gadgets and sampling alone will never 8do the trick since these items are also subject to Murphy's Law. Quality-controlinstrument need maintenance; gauges go out of order; X rays and laser beams need adjustments. No matter how advanced the technology, quality demands intelligent, motivated human thought and action.[2] Some 9reflection about the material culture or prehistoric and pre-industrial peoples may help to show what I mean. A single visit to a museum which displays artifacts used by simple pre-industrial societies is sufficient 10to dispel the notion that quality is dependent on technology. Artifacts may be of simple, even primitive design, and yet be built to serve their intended purpose in a reliable manner during a lifetime of use. We acknowledge this when we 11honor the label "handmade" and pay extra for the jewe1ry, sweaters, and handbags turned out by the dwindling breeds of modern-day craftspeople.[3] What is the source of quality that one finds, let us say,in a Porno Indian basket so tightly woven that it was used to hold boiling water and never leaked a drop, or in an Eskimo skin boat with its matchless combination of lightness, strength, and 12seaworthiness? Was it merely the fact that these items were handmade? I don't think so. In unskilled or 13uncaring hands a handmade basket or boat can fall apart as quickly as baskets or boats made by machines. I rather chink that the reason we honor the label "handmade" is because it evokes not a technological relationship between producer and product but a social relationship between producer and consumer. Throughout prehistory it was the fact the producers and consumers were either one and the same individuals or close kin that guaranteed the highest degree of reliability and durability in manufactured items. Men made their own spears, bows and arrows, and projectile points; women wove their own baskets and carrying nets, fashioned their own clothing from animal skins, bark9 or fiber. Later, as technology advanced and material culture grew more complex, different members of the band or village adopted craft specialties such as pottery-makings, basket-weaving, or canoe-building. Although many items were obtained through barter and trade, the connection between producer and consumer still remained intimate, permanent, and caring.[4] A man is not likely 14to fashion a spear for himself whose point will fall off in mid-flight; nor is a woman who weaves her own basket likely to make it out of rotted straw. Similarly, if one is sewing a parka for a husband who is about to go hunting for the family with the temperature at sixty below, all stitches will be perfect. And when the men who make boats are the uncles and fathers of those who sail them, they will be as seaworthy as the state of the art permits.[5] In contrast, it is very hard for people to care about strangers or about products to be used by strangers. In our era of industrial mass production and mass marketing, quality is a constant problem because the intimate 15sentimental and personal bonds which once made us responsible to each other and to our products have withered away and been replaced by money relationships. Not only are the producers and consumers strangers but the women and men involved in various stages of production and distribution --- management, the worker on the factory floor, the office help, the salespeople --- are also strangers to each other. In larger companies there may be hundreds of thousands of people all working on the same product who can never meet face-to-face or learn one another's names. The larger the company and the more complex its division of labor, the greater the sum of uncaring relationships and hence the greater the effect of Murphy's Law. 16Growth adds layer on layer of executives, foremen, engineers, production workers, and sales specialists to the payroll. 17Since each new employee contributes a diminished share to the overall production process, alienation from the company and its product are likely to increase along with the neglect or even purposeful sabotage of quality standards.。