THE  MEASURE  OF  COMPARATIVE  PRODUCTIVENESS  305
reasons  for  laying  off  a  worker,  has  been  this  difficulty.
Neither  the  foreman  nor  the  worker  considers  this  a  just
or  an  accurate  procedure,  for  the  very  reason  that  the
judgment  expressed  is  too  dependent  on  the  personal
equation  and  other  unreliable  variables.  On  the  other
hand,  the  record  of  a  man’s  actual  work,  his  comparative
productiveness,  is  an  impersonal  criterion  which  is  fair
from  both  points  of  view,  that  of  employee  and  employer,
and  does  not  excite  the  animosity  so  likely  to  be  aroused
by  a  personal  opinion.
A  third  reason  for  judging  moral  qualities  in  terms  of
production  rather  than  in  terms  of  the  descriptive  adjectives ­
  usually  applied  is  the  fact  that  the  former  is
usually  much  the  more  sensitive  indicator.  For  instance,
if  a  worker  has  been  out  late  the  night  before  or  has  taken
part  in  some  strenuous  celebration,  it  may  not  be  apparent
to  the  foreman  on  the  following  morning,  but  the  effects
will  hardly  escape  the  impartial  record  of  the  man’s  production ­
  for  that  day  or  ensuing  days.  Continuous  irregularities ­
  in  the  worker’s  manner  of  living  may  be  kept  from
the  foreman  for  a  long  time,  but  they  are  bound  to  affect
the  worker’s  ability  to  turn  out  work.  The  same  principle
applies  to  most  moral  traits.  Impatience,  lack  of  concentration, ­
  carelessness,  dissipation,  laziness,  dishonesty—all
of  these  traits  will  express  themselves  in  the  amount  of
work  done  by  the  individual  with  mathematical  certainty.
Therefore,  for  the  sake  of  this  increased  certainty  and
decreased  ambiguity,  the  description  of  a  worker’s  moral
qualities  should  be  limited  to  his  production  record.
There  are  instances,  to  be  sure,  in  which  the  moral
qualities  must  be  considered  in  themselves.  Honesty,  for
example,  is  not  always  or  entirely  expressed  in  a  man’s
productiveness.  Therefore  it  is  difficult  to  compare  men