The

Volume 4Issue 2
MARCHAPRIL 2003

Extension
A Technical Supplement to Control Network
2003 Contemporary Control Systems, Inc.

Dick MorleyFather of the Programmable Logic Controller

Dick Morley is the founder of Modicon
(now Schneider Automation, Inc.) and the
inventor of the PLC.
Today, he continues his work as a
nationally recognized expert in the field
of computer design, artificial intelligence,
automation, and authority on the factory
of the future. Morley is an engineer,
consultant and inventor, who holds more
than 20 United States and foreign patents.
He is also host of the annual Greek Pride
Day festival in New Hampshire.
In addition to his many rewards and distinctions, he is
father of three children and foster parent to 27! He is the
author of three books and numerous articles; his website
is www.barn.org. His latest book is Out Of The Barn. Our
contributing editor Perry Marshall caught up with Dick to
learn more about the man behind the reputation.
Dick, tell us a little bit about your growing up years...family
and local environment...ambition and pursuit of knowledge.
I was born in Clinton, Massachusettswas in the
third grade in farm country. We had a whole farm and
no other jobs with 100% income from the farm. Long
ride to school, and the farm was run by my mothers
side of the family of German heritage.
From the third to the seventh grade, I was in what
would be considered today as the bad sections of
NYC. We were children, and we accepted what was.
From seventh grade to the end of high school,
Highland Park, NJ and then to MIT for 4 years with no
degree. Took some subsequent work in mathematics
in graduate school at Northeastern.
The farming years were most important I think.
Everyone had to work. I vaguely remember that we
were driving the tractor when we were 6 or 7 years
old. The men and the women worked in the fields and
the only thing the kids were good for was brain work
not muscle work. We did the apple picking, driving the
hay wagons and all the rest.
My first mechanical memory was my cousin doing
repair work on the tractor to the head. The motto that
came back from that whole farming experience was,
Never pick up anything twice. This means that if you
make a road, make it 9 feet wide and salt it so you
never have to go back to it. If you put up a fence,

make sure its strong enough to last 10 or more years.

Repair will kill you, maintenance wont.
When in New York, I found that action and speed
were important. In hindsight, we lived in places that
wereby todays standardsrather violent. Diplomacy
did not workaction did. You learned how to be
diplomatic after the action had been completed.
With reference to ambition, I really had none. I still
drift through life. I have come to the conclusion that
the process of being is better than the goal of being.
One of the more interesting experiences was the
Saturday night bath. All we had was one wood stove
in the place that had any output at all, and we heated
hot water kettles. The baby got the first pass through
the wash tub; then each of the kids and finally the
adults once a week. The chocolate donuts from the
German baker from downtown Clinton were the best
things that I can remember ever tasting. For us, junk
food was lobster, swordfish and shark. Since we were
on a working farm, it took me years before I realized
that every ear of corn did not have a worm in it. We
sold the ones with no worms and we ate the corn
after picking them out.
You mentioned curiosity,
ambition and pursuit of
I have come to the
knowledge. This implies
conclusion that the
goals and a goal-oriented
process of being is
life. My private joke is that
better than the
Im the oldest teenager in
goal of being
town. Mine is a process of
living rather than a goal. Much like complex adaptive
systems, an emergency property of your behavior is
what determines your life. So the behavior was; dont
get hurt; have fun reading about technology; take care
of your parents; and eat well.
My books were science fiction and comics. The first
hardcover book that I rememberbut this cant be
truewas One, Two, Three, Infinity by George
Gamow. I also remember that just before my teenage
years of a book written by the Bell Lab meister
entitled Signals, Symbols and Noise. It awakened my
life to the visionary aspect of technology.
To give you some idea of how this process and
emergent property works, it is the college of my
choicebecause I made no choice.

(No part of the Extension may be reproduced without the written consent of Contemporary Controls.)

I was sitting in the last row of my English class in my

sophomore year. We were assigned to write away
to colleges. Our teacher put a whole bunch of colleges
on the board and had each student select one. Each
time one was selected, of course, it came off the list.
By the time it got to me, the only college left was MIT.
I had no idea what MIT was so I said, I have no
choice, Ill pick MIT. My English teacher said, If you
get into MIT, Ill eat my hat. That was the beginning of
that behavioral role.
In conclusion, my formative years were farms and
gang associations in New York City and intellectual
properties at the university. The farm, I think, set up
my ethical values. Theres an old statement I like that
says, Here in the northeast, we can eat our produce in
spring, summer and fall. In the winter, we have to eat
off of last years planning. It forced you to think ahead
and complete the task and do it right to start with.
I enjoyed working with my hands. The books were
technical and science fiction as the primary emphasis
that I remember. Almost none of the classics and none
of what used to be called the humanities.
What was your first real passion as a science project?
Fascinating question. One of the things I do remember is that I did practically no science projects at all
while I was in the suburbs of New York City (Astoria,
Long Island).
Looking back now, I realize it
was not a very healthy environMost of my science
ment for children, but nevertheprojects were not
less, I was there from the third
research but fun.
grade through the seventh grade.
Before that, I was raised on a
farm and I assisted, but not substantially, in engine
repair, sharpening axes and driving the tractor. On the
farm, driving the tractor was a kids job because you
couldnt do the heavy work. When you could reach
the clutch pedals, you drove.
Afterwards, when we moved to Highland Park, NJ
(near New Brunswick, NJ and Rutgers University), I
began to take up some minor science projects. For
example, I decided to build my own air conditioner
which was a failure. I made my own 4-cycle engine
from a machine with steelanother failure. My life
is littered with failures.
There were some things that were successful in
erector sets; however, I designed and constructed
several versions of a walking machine which worked
very well. There was a robotic device balanced on
two podsone slow and one dynamically balanced
on two legs that ran across the room at high speed. It
was, in effect, unstable without dynamic motion control. The unit had no intelligence but generally moved
on alternating pods.

During that time, I also played around a lot with

chemistry sets. I was a typical kiddogs, chemistry
sets (primarily with explosives and visible reactions),
log cabins, some electric trains, motors and some
automobile work but not as much as you might expect.
The first real science project I became involved with
was in chemistry in high school with an iodide formulation that was very explosive to the touch. We made
some of that to see how it worked. We also played
with DC excitation of a fluorescent bulb and used that
to modulate voice. Two things happened. One was we
could transmit over a photoelectric beam and secondly,
because it was DC excited, you could see the bands of
voice in the fluorescent tube. We then subsequently did
a demonstration in the high school auditorium of connecting the stage to speakers in the back of the room
on the balcony. To run the wires was almost impossible and we did it as an experiment. We also did some
staging for magicians tricks both with lighting and
smoke affects to get the thing going.
Most of my science projects were not research but
fun. They were dynamic, reactive and they elicited a
sense of wonder from my audience, consisting primarily
of my mother and dad and my brothers.
In hindsight, I notice that I was a curious person
with respect to the world around me while I was on
the farm and when we moved to New Jersey. But the
years in New York City seemed to be lost. I checked
with my two brothersBob and Jimand found that,
lo and behold, they cant remember anything that
happened in NYC either, other than survival.
I dont know what my first real passion was other
than the passion of living. I always have about half a
dozen irons in the fire at any one time and I love the
moment of discovery. Richard Feynman was a master
at this. Feynman would ask, Why does a piano smash
when it hits the sidewalk?
My question would be, Why dont we make computers a certain way or What would happen if we
didnt use thermocouples but back-biased diodes? Can
we build a... and on and on.
Ive gotten all kinds of awards. SOME of which I
think are deserved. Ive been in the technology business, the science and discovery business for so long
now that its a lifestyle rather than a talent or a gift.
Much life the chef who has learned how to cook over
many years. Its not a gift; if it had to be taken by fang
and claw from the world around us.
Gifts are usually not accepted well. Its when you
work for them that it makes a difference. So, us guys,
who arent as smart as you might think, have to make
sure that our persona and act satisfies the audience.

Can you tell me about the process of starting to discover

what your true gifts really were?
Im not sure quite what you mean by gifts. I
understand the question, of course, but its a most difficult question to answer. First, because I dont consider myself extraordinarily gifted and second, because
most gifts are, like Edison said, One percent inspiration, 99 percent perspiration.
It seems to me that most of us are presented with
what we call gifts during our whole lifetime. The
secret is being able to open the door when Mr. Gift
knocks on it.
I guess I remember a couple of
items in history. When I first went
Most of us are
to school, very early onbefore
presented with what
the third grade I believeI
we call gifts during
learned how to read before most
our whole lifetime.
people and they had a game/test
The secret is being
in school. The teacher would
able to open the
write down a number from zero
door when Mr.
to nine and the kids would try to
Gift knocks on it.
guess it. There was yelling and
hollering and they finally decided
that was pretty goodall these kids trying to guess
the number.
There was a problem thoughI seemed to guess the
right number an inordinate amount of time. Pretty
soon there was the principal and a number of other
teachers and they would make a demonstration about
how I could guess the number she had written on the
paper well before, with a higher percentage of accuracy than common sense would dictate. They decided it
was some kind of psychic gift or some such nonsense.
No one dreamed of asking me how I knew the
number. Finally, one of the teachers asked me about
the number and I pointed out that since we could see
the eraser of the pencil, the eraser traced the same
path as the number and it seemed to me that it wasnt
a guess and it was very simple, indeed. Most gifts are
perceived that wayas somehow mysterious and
strange when, in fact, most of the solutions and explanations are relatively simple.
The other that occurs to me is when I was in high
school I had rheumatic fever. I was bedridden for
many weeks and missed most of the report card term,
roughly one month, as was in vogue at that time. In
particular, English was an interesting subject because I
could return, take the test, and pass with flying colors.
I got very good grades on my English tests and my
teacher came over to me and said, Richard, you got
good results on your tests and your grades are very
good, but Im going to give you a D. Why? says I.
Because smart people like you have life too easy.
That was also an awakening: If the lights too
bright, put a shade over it.

These stories are, in hindsight, interesting. But at the

time they occurred, I thought nothing more of the matter and moved on. My gift for languages was negative
indeed. It took me four years to get three years of
Latin under my belt, although I took four years of
physics in the class of 54 at MIT. I never got a degree.
The primary reason was because at the time the
requirements included having to learn a foreign language.
Great writers, astronomers, painters and artists have
the particular talent of working on their strengths, not
their weaknesses.
When I was very young I could speak and understand German so I elected to study German. But I
could not get it through my cement skull what the
language was all about. Interesting that the gifts are
not so much gifts as selection of where to put your
neurons. Do you put them in languages or do you put
them in technology?
I learned something from Tiger Woods. He pointed
out that he works on his strengths in his golf game,
and not his weaknesses. That makes him a better
golfer, and in some sense separates him from the
normal, well-rounded golfer. The answer isdont be
broad and well-roundedbe narrow and deep. Put
what little brain power you have and exercise that
talent well.
What was the first major disappointment in your career and
how did it affect you?
I guess Ive got to set the stage for this one, as well.
The question implies that I have a goal in mind when
I do something. Au contraire, noble editor. I have a
process in mind. My fun and challenge is the process.
I fully understand that 80% of what I attempt to do
is going to be goal failure but not process failure. In
other words, its much like skiing or riding a motorcycle. As a downhill skier, I dont go anywhere. Its
the ride.
As a motorcyclist, while
my wife is driving the car
and Im riding the bike and
she says, Ill try to find
the shortest way home, I
say, I dont want the short
way home. I want the long
way home because of the ride, not because I wish to
go home.
Innovation comes from
the road and the
observation of it,
not the destination
of the road.

The question implies that there is a disappointment

in not getting home or to the right house on time or
on schedule. Any one of my friends will point out
that Im not a very good manager. But I am a good
thinker and innovator. Innovation comes from the road
and the observation of it, not the destination of the road.
This concept is hard for most people. For instance,
if I would like to be a chefand we owned a Thai
restaurant at one timeI would certainly want to
3

cook. It does not mean that I want to eat. The question

is that if I bake a cake and dont eat it all, is that
a disappointment? No. In fact, I need not eat any of
the cake and, as a matter of fact, I may not even
finish the making of it, if Im teaching a student how to
bake a cake. There is pride in the work itself and
the ability to work is only limited by the hours in the
day and the 70 years of life.
In the sense of the question, there are a great many
disappointments. We do angel and small company
investments and a large percentage of them fail. We
estimate that half of them break even (the living dead)
and only 10 to 5 per cent succeed in the sense of
decent payback for the investment made. Are we failures as angels and venture capitalists? Probably not.
The portfolio of life experience, not the individual
events in it, are the stew of life.
But lets get back to what you mean by disappointments. When I was very young, I found that I could
make an electromagnet by wrapping wire around
a piece of steel. In this day and age, that still seems
like magic and it certainly was at that time. Later on
I knew about electromagnetism and electricity but at
that young age I didnt know about it. I took the iron
and wrapped a wire around it and found I could make
the electromagnet.
That was fascinating. Of course, to the young,
unformed cement in my skull. I said, Gee, if thats the
case, then I should be able to take that same electromagnet and drive it from a speaker on the radio and
take another electromagnet and have a speaker across
the room that wasnt wire-connected. I could make a
wireless connection between speakers. Son of a gun,
it worked. the problem was, and my disappointment
was, that Maxwell and all radio people had discovered
this way before my timeI had discovered something
that had already been discovered long ago.
I dont know how this affected my life but it certainly
pushed my thinking further into the future so that
when I invent something, I want to make sure that it
was, indeed, innovative. I have a small bumper sticker
in mind as Im writing this. It says, Engineering is
solving problems, innovation is making problems.
So really, this question is the toughest of all. My job
and accomplishment is in attacking the problem, not
solving it. I have difficulty talking about the word
disappointment. My biggest disappointments are generally with people. People do things that I find Im
disappointed in. My disappointments are that people
believe in the horoscope, crop circles, alternative medicines and the like. Those are disappointments in my
life. People look at things and certainly adhere to the
bumper sticker that says, Believing is seeing.

Im going to guess that corporations and quarterly profit

types, ruthlessly pragmatic people in the business world,
have sometimes not understood your obsession with the
process.
I dont consider the business
types ruthlessly pragmatic, but
instead, realistic. It turns out that
profit is the protein of a business
or enterprise. And as such, the
animal we call an enterprise
must survive on a day-to-day
basis. It must have water and food like any other
organism in the universe. We cannot feed them once
every ten years.
Engineering is not
solving problems,
innovation is
making problems.

There are animals, such as polar bears that can go

for weeks without food and do so on a continuous
basis. But most of us have to have something to eat at
least once a week and water at least once a day.
On that note, we have to satisfy their needs. I really
do try to take my far-out projects that have a life span
of, say, five years and make sure that each stage of
that project has a benefit to the enterprise, funding the
endeavor at least once a year. In other words, every
year they should get a chance to eat.
Im reminded of the people of the equator who,
when theyre hungry, take a banana off the tree. Thats
not pragmatic. Im also thinking about the people of
the frozen north who, on a daily basis, can barely survive.
The temperate zones, however, are where you find
the people who have the ability to plan. As I sit here
in the middle of New Hampshire, for example, I notice
theres a foot or two of snow outside and it would be
impossible to live here without planning. We have
here approximately eight months of excellent growing
weather. We can eat and live quite well.
But, you say, What do we eat in the winter? We eat
the plans we made in the summer. So we have to both
eat and plan. But we cant plan too far ahead.
We do, however, buy houses that way, raise children
and the like. We have what amounts to a 20to 50year
life plan. You may go to high school, choose your
career and operate in that career mode for 30 to 40
years. Not unreasonable.
Business leaders are not ruthlessly pragmatic, but I
think they understand instinctively that they have to
deal with keeping the organism alive and then make
choices. Wealth is defined by me and my motorcycle
buddies as the ability to have choices. On that basis,
we have to be wealthy in the short term so we can
be wealthy in the long term. And the future feeds off
the plans made today.
The position you are in today descended from
decisions you made five years ago. Almost every CEO

Ive spoken to understands that. People like Dick

Morley, however, have trouble understanding that they
also have to make payroll next week. Both of us are
needed, but as Edison said, Its one percent inspiration, 99 percent perspiration.

just a style or an ideology. I feel about business the

same way I feel about an ant colony: it needs support
and protection in order to thrive.

I suppose people come to you from time to time because of

your reputation, and they have a business or technology
project they want help withbut they dont understand how
you think. So how have you dealt with that?

Thats an intriguing question.

Im having trouble thinkThe people who are
ing
about
a true disappointmost dangerous are
ment,
but
I have come up
the chameleons.
with surprises. There are four
kinds of people as Napoleon said: busy bright, busy
dull, lazy bright and lazy dull. The most dangerous are
the busy dull and the most useful are the busy bright.
The lazy dull and the lazy bright are critiques of society
in general, they seldom contribute in any form.

People do come to me from time to time because

of my overblown reputation and they have a business
or technology that they want help with. Most of the
time, however, they have a direction they want help
with. I feel like Lucy in Charlie BrownPsychiatry-5 cents.
It turns out my physics training was excellent for
this. It allows me to look at what is rather than what
should be.
Many times they dont understand how I think and I
sometimes dont understand how they think. Its what
makes the world go around. Let me give you
an example.
In England, they drive on the left hand side of the
road. We, in America, consider that the wrong side.
We should, however, only consider it the other side,
not the wrong side. They dont understand how I
think and thats fine as long as I can deliver for them.
I feel like the car mechanic or the chef. No one needs
to know what we do in the kitchen. The process in
the kitchen is unknown to the casual diner and should
stay that way. Most people I know who worked
in restaurants dont like to eat in the ones they worked
in because they saw the process.
As a young man, how did you feel about the business world?
When I was a young man, I
didnt think much about busiWealth is defined
ness, or for that matter, much of
by me as the
anything except technology. I
ability to have
read Popular Science, Popular
choices.
Mechanics, had erector sets,
Tinkertoys, electric motors,
chemistry sets and all of those good things. I did not
have an MBA kit or a social studies or geography kit
or a cool kit. Most of the kids I hung out with were
dealing with the world as it is (by facts), not the world
populated by opinion.
Have you ever noticed that on public TV they never
show the life of the corporation? They show the life
of some obsolete tribe, the life of the Aztecs, the
Romans, the religious lives, all of the various liberal
and conservative factions, but Ive yet to see the life of
the corporation presented as a live, dynamic entity.
Remember, these organizationssuch as the army
and the corporationssupport our whole species, not

As far as people disappointments, what were some early

projects that were rough in the people department?

There is another common thing we talk about here.

There are various people we call good guys and bad
guys. Now, the bad guys we can deal with as well as
the good guys. The reason we can deal with those,
and theyre never disappointing, is because we know,
generally, what reaction and direction we will get,
given we stimulate these people in a certain way. And
these people can trade things just like driving on either
side of the road.
The people who are most dangerous on the highway, however, are the chameleons. They drive on both
sides of the road. The chameleons are most difficult
to deal with and are the most disappointing. A good
guy, for example, who suddenly does something
unforeseen to his comrades, or the bad guy who is
suddenly a good guy. The chameleons are the most
dangerous because of their unpredictability.
My son, Robert Morley, died after eight years from
aplastic anemia, at the age of 32. If there was stem
cell work during his life, theres a strong chance he
would be alive today. I consider the liberal fascists
and the conservative communists who hold their
idealism above human life as a disappointment.
Another disappointment I had was with Jesse
Jackson in Florida. Although I do not approve of his
idealism, I was disappointed in the fact that he did not
work for his idealism before the elections but complained after the elections. If Mr. Jackson had worked
hard before, he would have gotten his man in. I somehow thought that Mr. Jackson was more intellectual
and idealistic than that. In other words, I hoped he
would work for the cause to win, rather than for the
publicity opportunity of after-the-fact rhetoric.
In project work, I seldom, if ever, am people-disappointed. I find I have to avoid certain people and do
it myself, but in general all of us are alike. Its our
expectations that give us the trouble.
We expect too much from ourselves and from our
comrades-in-arms. If we keep our expectations in the
5

animal kingdom rather than the moral, idealistic

kingdom, we are seldom disappointed; life goes on
and we can deal with the world the way it is. One of
the late-night talk showsI think it was Jay Lenohad
someone like Tom Hanks on. Tom Hanks career went
up and down. Jay Leno asked him how he solved the
problem and Tom Hanks said it was only three words
that helped him solve the problem. They were Deal
with it. If you have a flat tire, fix the flat. Dont be
disappointed that the tire went flat.
We teach our foster kids that everything that happens
to them is a result of the process they were in and that
its their own fault.
Tell us about the AEG acquisition of Modicon and then the
Schneider ownership.
If my memory serves me right,
AEG was not the first acquisition
Most overnight
of Modicon, Gould was. Gould
successes take
was an old line battery manufacthe better part
turer run by a fellow named
of a decade.
Ivelsector, which Fortune
Magazine called of the five toughest bosses in take
USA. I admired him because I thought he was a realistic, as opposed to a politically correct, MBA.
Nine years after the technical founding of Modicon,
Gould acquired them. Gould had acquired Modicon in
1977 as part of Goulds expanding into a mini-conglomerate. Second generation Gould management were
(or wanted to be) Jet-Setters and they tended to run
the now public corporation as they had a privately
held Gould. They bought a Florida execute jet service,
a polo resort; and gave Prince Charles and Lady Diana
a Condo as a wedding present.
After that acquisition, AEG acquired the Gould
Automation Group in the early 80s. At that time,
Modicon was the major component and the moneymaker for the Gould group. Schneider acquired
Modicon via the Gould/AEG Automation Group and
still owns them.
One of the reasons we sold was because in the
early days of the Modicon board there was a desire of
some of the investors and venture capitalists to liquidate their holdingsa reasonable desire. After all, it
had been a decade. But also, the new conglomerate hit
financial skids and, pushed by analysts, cutbacks
became the order of the day. Viable assets like
Modicon were on the block. After a major goof by top
Gould-Modicon management, AEG acquired Modicon. I
think this was about 1988 or 89.
AEG had an awkward two chains of command
handling their American assets and they also got into
financial trouble. The German Govt leaned on
Daimler-Benz to bail out AEG and D-B pushed AEG to
stop the bleeding. In 1994, AEG sold half their interest
of their PLC & industrial controls business to Schneider

(Brussels) who controlled Telemechanique automation

products. In 1996, Schneider bought AEGs half and
became Groupe Schneider.
The last survey we did on venture capital indicated
that the average time from the back of the envelope to
full liquidity is nine years. Most overnight successes
take the better part of a decade. Certainly a long night.
To some extent, the acquisitions are merely the
stockholders, not the companies. I was neither truly an
employee nor a member of the corporation other than
a board member and consultant to the Modicon group.
My role was primarily the design, at least in concept,
of the first units and guidance thereafter. The early
units clearly had my hand in them, but on the later
units I felt like a pearl. As you know, a pearl is an irritant that gets covered with a comfortable, smooth, hard
coating and later in life, expelled from the organism.
My association with the technology was from 1968 to
after 1998, clearly a long reign. It lasted longer than the
stockholders acquisition.
From my point of view, the stocks and who owns
them is, in part, the paperwork. Since I am merely an
actor on the stage of a Woody Allen movie, the
character I play (i.e., the one who owns the stock) is a
flashing involvement. A deep involvement, certainly,
but I know there will be another movie to act in and
another owner. The technology, however, marches on.
My deep concern with the ownership was whether
or not the ownership with the board became truly
short-term financial, blocking what I consider to be
the geek-like process of technological evolution. The
mutation we call the programmable controller needs
to evolve to optimize its status on the landscape
of survival.
In other words, the Gould/AEG/Schneider sequence
of ownership from a private company had little or no
effect upon me. I remember clearly when Gould sold
to AEG. We had a big meeting down on Cape Cod and
I was wearing a Gould tie on purpose.
I stood on the stage, took off my tie, put it on the
ground and stamped on it. My short and entire talk
was:

Modicon is back.
The crowd was in ecstasy. Remember, the village I
live in is populated with engineers.

OK, so youre the famous inventor of the PLC. How do you

view that accomplishment in the context of the other things
youve done in your life?
Interesting question, but again, it is a sequence. In
the past I have been involved with things such as the
ABS system in your car, the floppy disk, magnetic
thin films and super computers. I think that the PLC is
certainly the biggest and most important thing for
society that Ive ever done other than my 27 foster
children plus my own three.

What do you feel the biggest chasm is right now that needs
to be crossed for automation to move forward?
The classical manufacturing business has moved out
of the US. Right now, most of the factories we are
involved in are assembly processes, not manufacturing
processes. China is a huge percentage of the worlds
manufacturing at the moment and is in the de facto
manufacturing department of most American companies. This is not because we feel as though thats the
way it should be, its just that the factor of ten difference in cost and the willingness to take it on
are important.

Im a firm believer in the mafia rules:

Take care of your health

Take care of your family

Then take care of your business

For me, business is the conversion of basic ideas on

the innovative trail to deliver to the marketplace better
things for better living, to paraphrase an old General
Electric motto.
In other words, the PLC is important to the automotive discreet and process business. Discreet (things) and
process (stuff) is significantly involved. My philosophy
is that since nobody wants their children to work in
automotive plants or chemical plants putting tires on
Buicks and making chemical fertilizerthese jobs have
left the country.
Because those jobs left the country, our competitive
survival depended upon automation. The jobs leaving
caused automation to occur. Automation did not push
the jobs out. The jobs pulled in automation.
Some of the theories of innovation and the PLC indicates
Automation did not
strongly that the inventions make
push the jobs out.
themselves and the so-called
The jobs pulled
inventors are merely the closest
in automation.
bystanders when the happening
occurs. My daddy told me, Tis better to be lucky
than smart.
I get asked the same thing about writing books. It
isnt the writing thats the enthusiastic process, its the
having written thats the important part. Most of the
true stories of my comrade inventors indicate that the
real story is not the story you read in Time Magazine.
The real story is one of annoyance, pain, hobbies and
why dont they?
We dont seem to have a goal, we merely seem to
have a process. Invention, innovation and the importance of the invention are outcomes of the inherent
process of trying to build sand castles on the beach.

Bankers do not
grow a community,
the use of the
banks assets in
taking risk does.

Although laudable in many

cases, environmental concerns,
zoning and lack of engineering
and manufacturing heroes
block the growth of manufacturing here in the U.S.

As an example, machine tool business and

manufacturing business for the US is down quite a bit.
This is not because the machines that we purchase,
either here or globally, are not effective; its because
no high school graduate dreams of running a CNC
machine. They prefer guitars, movies and sports.
Im reminded of the Forbes list of the 400 richest
people in America several years ago. About 30% of
them did not have a college degree, and there were
very few entertainers, sports figures or company
presidents on the list. It was primarily populated by
driven people, many in the growth of the technology
arena we call engineering, innovation and development.
Moving forward across the chasm of innovation and
improved productivity is culturally difficult in the manufacturing segment. In pharmaceuticals, your childrens
education and fighter aircrafts, we have no problem
making innovative statements. But in manufacturing,
we look for the dreaded four-letter words:

Near-Term Cost.
The emphasis on cost, instead of value, is our
blockage.
The only way to create wealth is with innovation.
This essential truth must be transmitted to the next
generation of doers in the application of automation
technologies.
Im a small player in the angel investment business.
We accept individual risk because the portfolio rewards
are high. The risk-reward ratio is the key element. Zero
risk is a mathematically impossible goal to achieve, but
what can be achieved is value across the portfolio that
steps forward on the risk-taking landscape.

As Shaw says, All progress depends upon unreasonable men. Bankers do not grow a community, the use
of the banks assets in taking risk does.
In order for us to have automation move forward,
we must embrace modeling, the magic of predictive
technology, the disassembly of IT standards and the
acceptance of what is, not what should be.
Our thanks go to Ken Ball for contributing to this article.
Ken Ball is recognized as a long-time writer and publisher in the
automation business.
He began his career as an engineering physicist. Ball had
some experience with Martin Aircrafts advance design department on a nuclear seaplane project and in unsteady flight
trajectory analyzes. He joined Mine Safety Appliances (MSA)
and developed trace gas detection instruments.
In 1967 Ball joined Rimbach as an editorial director for
I & CS until Rimbach sold out to Chilton Publishing and
Chilton decided to re-locate the Rimbach Group out east. Thats
when Ball set-up his own business in the early 70s in which he
did some simple systems engineering plus technical writing.
On a contract basis, he has been the editorial director for ISAs
InTech and Programmable Controls Journals. He also applied his
skills as an editor with the Carbide & Tool Journal and the
Abrasive Engineers Magazine.
While working on Programmable Controls, he became friends
with Dick Morley and participated in the Club-of-Detroit
meetings. Since that time he has been collecting material on the
PLC, incorporating it into articles as needed.

www.ccontrols.com
Past issues of the Extension are available. If you would like a
copy, please send your request to info@ccontrols.com