every working unit into which the Government is organized for the performance of its functions, but also the relations of such units to each other as regards direct lines of administrative authority.

By a unit of organization is meant not merely such a formal organization as a bureau, a division, or a section, but all further subdivisions which comprise reasonably distinct groups of employees required for the performance of special duties; all plant or operation units, such as quarters specially devoted to the performance of particular kinds of work, vessels, warehouses, etc. Thus the plan contemplates, as one of its essential features, the indication of everything in the nature of a shop, laboratory, photographic gallery, blue-print room, depot, etc., and every point in the field at which a station is maintained or work is done by or under the direction of the Government. The effort is also made to show, in its proper place, each collateral agency of administration, such as a board, commission, or committee with reasonably permanent status, since these bodies constitute a part of the machinery through which the affairs of Government are being conducted.

Every effort has been made to carry the outlines of organization down to these final units, for it is only by showing these final working units that a real picture is obtained of the manner in which the Government is actually organized for the performance of its work. And it is only as information of this character is secured that it becomes possible to determine the extent to which a number of units of the same character are in existence, or that several units perform the same function, and thus to ascertain whether duplication or overlapping exists within the services of the same bureau or department, or within the Government as a whole.

For many reasons this outline of organization should be carried to its logical conclusion, viz, that of showing the individual employees constituting the working force of each final unit of organization, properly classified and indicating for each his or her service title, compensation, and duties. Owing to the great difficulties that are involved, no attempt has been made to push the present outline that far, except in the case of the District of Columbia. In the case of the latter the effort was made in order to show by a practical example the character of outline of organization that would result and the valuable information that is thereby afforded. It has not been practicable up to the present time to do the same work for the other services.

As is elsewhere pointed out, the work of securing the data for the outlines in their present detail has been one of great magnitude. One of the principal difficulties encountered has been that of making clear to the hundreds of services and persons collaborating in supplying the data exactly what was wanted. Services having no clearly defined scheme of organization, upon being called upon to report the manner in which they are organized, have shown a strong tendency to work out an organization on paper which would show a logical assignment of duties to divisions, although in fact no such divisions were in existence, or, if in existence, were not grouped in the manner shown. With the best of intentions, and with a clear idea of what was desired, it was still a difficult matter, in many cases, to determine what was a unit of organization. These difficulties would be multiplied many fold if the attempt were made to treat the individual as

the final unit, since so many cases exist where the same individual performs duties in more than one organization unit.

These difficulties are by no means insuperable, as is demonstrated in the case of the District of Columbia. They can and should be overcome, and an outline of organization worked out that will show the place of each employee in the Government. It is evident, however, that this can not be done until a definite decision is reached regarding the organization units, under which the individuals should be shown. Both as a matter of practical expediency, and because otherwise the publication of the present outlines and report would be greatly delayed, it has not been deemed advisable, therefore, at the present time to push this work that far except the single case that has been mentioned. There is, however, no reason why the several services should not take up their outlines as here presented and carry them to this desirable conclusion, and it is the recommendation of the commission that this be done in all cases.

Loose-leaf system.-Attention has been called to the fact that the main purpose of this compilation is to furnish information that can be currently used by administrators, in the same way as they currently use data developed by a proper accounting and reporting system, as one of their tools of administration. If the outlines are to serve this purpose, it is imperative they should be prepared in such a way that they can be kept constantly revised to date. This end is secured by adopting the device of the loose leaf in presenting the data. Instead of attempting to set out the outline of the Government of the United States as one continuous statement the principle is adopted of giving on one sheet only the main subdivisions of the organization unit to which the sheet refers, and of presenting the detailed outlines of organization of these subdivisions on supporting sheets. If a change in organization takes place, all that needs to be done is the rewriting of the particular sheet or sheets affected and the substitution of the new sheet or sheets for the old.

The economy that can be realized is but a small part of the advantages resulting from the use of this loose-leaf system. In the first place, it brings out, in a way that a continuous statement fails to do, the coordinate units of organization. Thus, for example, if one desires to determine what are the primary units that is, the bureaus and services-covered by the Department of Commerce and Labor, it would be necessary for him, in case the outline of organization of that department is shown as a continuous statement, to run over a large number of pages in order to pick out those bureaus and services that are of coordinate rank as indicated by the indentation and identification code numbers. The same operation would have to be followed by him if he desired to determine the primary units into which one of the bureaus is divided. Under the loose-leaf system these coordinate units appear one below the other on the same sheet, the subdivisions of each being carried on supporting sheets which are referred to by page numbers.

This system, if rigidly adhered to, would require a separate sheet in each case where a subdivision of a unit is set up. This would require hundreds, if not thousands, of sheets in order to show the organization of a single department. It is not necessary, however, to carry this loose-leaf system to such an extreme. In many cases the

organization in detail of a unit of organization can be given as a continuous statement, since the number of subordinate units shown is not so great as to prevent the eye from readily detecting the coordinate subdivisions. In preparing this report, the commission has consequently exercised its discretion in determining to what extent details should be carried on supporting sheets. The individual departments and services are not bound, however, by the decision of the commission in this respect. In maintaining their own outlines they should depart from the decision of the commission in so far as in their opinion seems wise.

Another advantage of the loose-leaf system is that it makes it possible for the several services to take up the outline where it now leaves off and secure further details of organization, these additional details being entered upon supporting sheets inserted in their proper places. Finally, the use of loose leaves makes it possible, if it is desired to do so, to split up the outlines into parts and give to each service only those sheets which affect its organization.

Scheme of classification of organization units.-The general scheme of classification that has been adopted is clearly shown by the outlines. There are a few features, however, upon which it is desirable specially to comment.

The first feature is that the primary aim of the outlines is to show organization rather than functions. It might seem that little trouble would be encountered in doing this. Practically, however, many difficulties have been encountered in carrying out this aim. Strange as it may seem, many services or important branches of services have no well recognized scheme of organization units that extends below the primary units into which they are divided. Such services would report classes of work" or functions as their organization units. This tendency was one generally encountered throughout the work, and the commission has had to use care in unraveling the complications thus presented and in arriving at statements that represented actual organization conditions. Notwithstanding the efforts made it is certain that a satisfactory solution has not been arrived at in all

cases.

66

In one important respect, however, the matter of functions does find a place, or at least expression, in this scheme of organization. As organization is shown by successive subdivisions, there is a steady progress, from units representing divisions of service more or less arbitrarily established in order that supervision over certain work to be done may be vested in the hands of certain officials, to units representing particular duties to be performed, until the point is reached where organization units correspond very closely with functional units. This is quite generally true of final units, which frequently represent little more than an enumeration of the classes of work or classes of employees included in the next more comprehensive unit. In other words, the fact must be recognized that, as organization is carried to a finer and finer degree, the units become, from a strictly organization standpoint, less and less definite, and more and more descriptive of functions.

A second feature is the principle upon which these organization units are classified. This principle is that of indicating the organization units so as to show their relationship to each other as determined by direct lines of administrative authority. By applying this

principle the place of each unit in the entire scheme is shown in relation to the successive units through which the lines of authority extend both up and down, and the extent to which units are coordinate is brought out.

Two consequences of following this principle should be noted. The first is that the fact that two units are coordinate in rank by no means indicates that they are of even approximately equal importance either as to size or as to character of work. For example, a unit having but a single employee, as a library, may appear side by side with large divisions, such as those of disbursement or supplies having a large personnel.

The second is that the outlines can not show relationships between units except as determined by the main line of administrative authority. Thus, for example, the unit "chief clerk" or "division of appointments" will have direct functional relations with probably all the units of a service. The outlines, however, will indicate such unit only as it falls under some more comprehensive unit and show under it the working units for the performance of its work. The facts in regard to its functional activities or duties in respect to other units can be brought out only by the charts, as will be pointed out hereafter, or by means of the descriptive notes which should accompany and explain the outlines.

Grouping of organization units.-There are many cases where a number of units have to do with matters so closely related to each other that it is desirable to show them under some group designation even though there is actually no unit of organization corresponding to such designation. The most important example of this is found in the case of the divisions or sections of a department, bureau, or other service having to do with matters of general administration. For example, the Department of Commerce and Labor has as its primary units of organization not only such functional bureaus as the Bureau of Corporations, Bureau of Standards, Coast and Geodetic Survey, etc., but also certain business divisions, such as the Office of the Chief Clerk, Division of Appointments, Division of Publications, and Disbursing Clerk. The duties of these divisions relate to the work of the department as a whole instead of to work in a particular field. It was thought that a useful purpose would be served by making clear this distinction between units having duties in relation to the department as a whole and those having certain duties in relation to their own fields. This is done by grouping the former with the office proper of the Secretary and Assistant Secretary (both of whom also have duties in respect to the whole department) under the general designation of "General administration." Of course it is possible to do this only so far as it can be done without doing violence to organization conditions as they actually exist. If one of the functional bureaus is given charge of the performance of certain duties, such as publication work or the handling of supplies, for not only itself but the other bureaus, a division handling such matters would have to be shown under that bureau in which it is actually located. Only in exceptional cases, however, is this condition of affairs found to exist.

An interesting example of the adoption of this system of grouping related services, which has found expression in formal administrative

regulations, is to be seen in the Navy Department. There the large number of bureaus going to make up the general administration of the department, as distinct from the management of the fleet, naval stations, and ships under construction in private yards, are, with the exception of the offices of the Secretary, Assistant Secretary, Chief Clerk, and General Board, grouped in four classes known as Division of Operations of the Fleet, Division of Personnel, Division of Material, and Division of Inspection. These are mere group designations since there are no organization units, properly speaking, corresponding to them.

Classification of commissions, boards, and Government establishments. Still another matter requiring a few words of explanation has to do with the decision reached by the commission in respect to the assignment of commissions, boards, and independent Government establishments, to their proper places in the scheme of outline of organization. This is a matter that gave the commission a great deal of trouble, and it is not certain that in every case a decision has been reached that will be approved by all. The cases giving rise to the greatest difficulty were those of determining whether certain commissions should be shown as subordinate units of Congress, or subordinate units of the executive, or a particular department, and of determining whether certain services usually classed as "other Government establishments" should be indicated under that head or under "legislative." Reference is had to the Government Printing Office, the Library of Congress, and the National Botanic Garden. It was finally decided that they should be shown as subordinate units of the legislative branch, since the line of administrative control and supervision seems to run directly from them to Congress.

Problems of nomenclature.-Finally some reference should be made to the difficulties encountered growing out of the absolute lack of system that exists in respect to the naming of organization units. Such designations as "divisions," "sections," "offices," "branches,' and the like seem to be used almost interchangeably. In some cases subdivisions of a division are known as sections, while in other cases the section is the more comprehensive and the division the subordinate unit. In many cases units have not been given any well-recognized designation, and names for them have been provided for the first time for the purposes of this outline. The particular designation employed for a unit can not thus be relied upon as indicating either its status or importance.

In handling this matter the commission has, with few exceptions, followed the scheme of nomenclature used by the different services in their reports to the commission. The most important instances in which the commission has used its discretion in respect to this matter are the dropping of the words "office of" and giving simply the name of the officer in charge, as, for example, "chief clerk" instead of office of chief clerk," and in adopting a standard title for the immediate office of the head of a service. The designation employed is "Office proper of the Secretary" (or other officer as the case may be). This designation is intended to cover only the employees, such as private secretary, doorkeeper, and messenger, working directly for the officer designated. It logically constitutes the first unit under the designation "General administration."