194

EMPLOYMENT  PSYCHOLOGY

the  case  of  the  psychologist.  His  tests  are  adapted  to  the
selection  of  the  more  ordinary  variety  of  workers,  the
nature  of  whose  work  conforms  to  certain  fairly  well
standardized  forms.  However,  the  farther  away  he  gets
from  these  forms—that  is,  the  more  complicated  and  exceptional ­
  the  work  becomes—the  less  applicable  are  his
tests.  This  tendency  is  characteristic  of  all  scientific
progress.  It  is  well  expressed  in  the  trite  saying:  “Genius
knows  no  law.”  Not  that  the  genius  is  beyond  the  scope
of  the  law.  He  is  governed  by  law  as  much  as  any  other
man.  The  scientist,  however,  or  the  psychologist  does
not  know  the  law  or  the  rule  which  applies  to  the  exceptional ­
  being.  Therefore,  he  has  little  if  any  advantage
over  the  ordinary  manager  when  it  comes  to  selecting
exceptional  men.  The  technique  of  medicine  may  make
a  man  of  poor  ability  a  relatively  successful  physician.
However,  as  soon  as  he  encounters  a  case  distinctly  beyond ­
  the  scope  of  his  technique,  his  remedies  are  almost
on  a  par  with  the  ordinary  house  remedies.  This  is  much
more  true  in  the  case  of  the  psychologist  whose  technique
is  as  yet  in  a  less  highly  developed  state.  Up  to  a  certain
point,  his  technique  enables  him  to  select  people  with
special  success.  Beyond  that  point,  his  success  is  a  personal ­
  matter,  distinct  from  his  technique,  and  depending
more  largely  on  his  individual  ability.  In  so  far  as  the
psychologist  is  a  good  manager,  he  may  also  be  successful
in  selecting  big  men.  In  so  far  as  he  is  a  poor  manager,
he  is  bound  to  fail  in  his  attempt.  Where  the  scientific
method  stops,  the  strength  and  weakness  of  the  personal
equation  must  again  have  the  last  word.