RENEE EN TECHHECALLY WAEHEQ 9E§$GNNEEL FOR THE BAERY ENQUSITRY Thu-ts. {up {he Mme of M. 5. MICHEGAN STATE UNIVERSITY Samuel E. Rossi 1966 firsts f ~ LIBRAR Y ‘ Midfigan Sum U . . ABSTRACT TRENDS IN TECHNICALLY TRAINED PERSONNEL FOR THE DAIRY INDUSTRY by Samuel E. Rossi The purpose of this study was to determine the supply and demand for dairy technology graduates, and to investigate ways and means of alleviating the shortages of dairy tech— nologists. Three areas were selected for intensiVe investiga- tion by questionnaire in 1965: (l) departments in.univer— sities with dairy technology curricula, (2) Michigan dairy plants, and (3) large national and regional dairy plants. Forty—six dairy technology departments reported a total enrollment of 511 undergraduates in 1965, with 111 graduating dairy technologists, or an average of 2.9 grad— uates per university. These few graduates have seriously affected the ability of dairy companies in Michigan and the United States to find technically trained men. The high demand for dairy technologists is reflected in the average of five job openings reported per bachelors degree graduate in June 1964. Dairy companies in both plant surveys would hire more dairy technologists for Specific Samuel E. Rossi jobs as supervisors, foremen, salesmen, laboratory techni- cians, fieldmen, and other managerial positions. The short- age of technologists is likely to continue since dairy tech- nology departments expected enrollment between 1966 and 1970 to increase slightly or remain the same. Curriculum changes showed a trend to consolidation of dairy technology into food technology curricula. More courses were also offered in business, humanities, engineer- ing, and communication skills. These changes will probably satisfy the requests of the industry for more training in business and engineering. Large corporations suggested more training in food science as well as business and engineering. Graduates in food science, business, and engineering were suggested as possible substitutes if dairy technolo— gists were unavailable. The few large dairy plants in Michigan offered train- ing on a continuous basis. On-the—job training was the most frequent method used to train both supervisory and production personnel. Supervisors were more often encouraged to attend outside short courses and conferences than were unskilled plant employees. Both professors of dairy technology departments and officers of large corporations suggested intensive recruit— ing of high school students to alleviate the shortage. Both stressed the need for more and better publicity of the Samuel E. Rossi opportunities in dairy technology, along with the creation of a favorable image for the industry. The dairy technology departments recommended higher starting salaries for grad- uates as an aid to recruiting. Increased emphasis should be placed on upgrading the skills of present employees. The following alternatives can provide this training: 1. Fundamental principles of dairy product process- ing, bacteriology, quality control, and dairy engineering could be taught by a company designated instructor using current dairy textbooks and other informational material from industry sources. 2. A series of lectures in dairy technology, Spon- sored by the dairy technology associations or several dairies, could be presented to trainees at a central location. Funda- mental principles of dairy processing would be presented by university or industry personnel, and the program could be eXpanded to include managerial and business tOpics. 3. A dairy could develop self-instruction carrels using tape recorded lectures and single-concept film projec- tors to present material on machine operation, materials handling, laboratory testing, plus lectures on basic funda- mentals as above. 4. Trade associations could sponsor the develOpment of programmed instructional material for teaching machines to be used in promoting individual learning of basic dairy Samuel E. Rossi processing fundamentals; problems in standardizing, mix for— mulation, and engineering; and supervisory techniques and business tOpics. 5. Several corporations could investigate tele- lecture and tele-writer systems to bring university short course lectures in dairy processing, and other subjects (not requiring visual aids) as bacteriology, chemistry, and man- agement to many dairies simultaneously. 6. Dairy companies in c00peration with the univer- sity could use closed circuit television to bring both oral and visual training presentations to several dairies at once. It could be used where written and pictorial materials are required, as dairy chemistry, bacteriology, engineering prob— lems, materials handling, machine Operation; managerial tech- niques as interviews, and role playing; or business subjects as economics or accounting. 7. Computer directed teaching machines, or dialed access lectures could present instructions in bacteriology, chemistry, engineering problems, or business simulation games for managerial trainees. TRENDS IN TECHNICALLY TRAINED PERSONNEL FOR THE DAIRY INDUSTRY By Samuel E. Rossi A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Department of Food Science 1966 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author wishes to thank Dr. T. I. Hedrick for his guidance and criticisms in the preparation of this manuscript, for his direction of the Masterg program, and for the excellent training he has provided. The author thanks Professors A. L. Rippen and W. J. Crissy for their direction, advice and suggestions in the preparation of this study, and for serving as mem- bers of the committee. Sincere appreciation is also ex— tended to Dr. G. M. Trout for his friendship, cooperation and encouragement. The author is also grateful to Mr. F. M. Skiver, Dairy Division, Michigan Department of Agriculture, and Mr. Frank Koval, Michigan Dairy Foods Association for their cooperation in allowing the use of their files. Gratitude is also eXpressed to the Dairy and Food Industries Supply Association whose fellowship made this study possible. ii TABLE OF(XEUENTS INTRODUCTION REVIEW OF LITERATURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Growth Trend in the Dairy Industry Trends in the Labor Force . Education and the Labor Force Demands for Technical and Managerial Personnel METHODS Survey of University Departments with a Dairy Technology Curriculum . . . . . . . . Survey of Michigan Dairy Plants . . Survey of Large National and Regional Dairy Corporations . . . . . . . . . . . . . Data Tables . . . . . . . . . RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Survey of University Departments with a Dairy Technology Curriculum Survey of Michigan Dairy Plants Survey of Large National and Regional Dairy Corporations RECOMMENDATIONS Factors Involved in Training Practical Training Programs for Dairy Plants Use and Application of Mechanical Training Devices Projectors Self- Instruction Carrels Programmed Instructional Material Teaching Machines Tele-Lecture Tele-Writer iii 53 62 62 65 68 69 7O 71 72 74 76 Page Closed Circuit Television . . . . . . . . . . 77 Computer Assisted Training . . . . . . . . . . 79 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 LITERATURE CITED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 APPENDIX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 iv Table LIST OF TABLES BachelorE degrees granted in dairy technology and food technology, 1962- 1965 inclusive Average number of reported job openings per bachelors, masters, and doctoral graduate, 1964 . . . . Suggestions for graduates from other disciplines to fulfill needs for dairy technologists . . ReSponses on the availability of jobs in 123 Michigan dairy plants from October 1964 to October 1965 Sources of skilled personnel for jobs in 117 Michigan dairy plants Training programs offered by Michigan dairy plants . . . . Preferences for graduates of other disciplines when dairy technologists were not available Page 25 29 35 43 45 48 58 LIST OF APPENDIX FIGURES Figure Page 1. Enclosure letter for dairy technology department survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9O 2. Questionnaire sent to university dairy technology departments . . . . . . . . . . 91 3. Enclosure letter for Michigan dairy plant survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 4. Questionnaire sent to Michigan dairies . . . 94 5. Enclosure letter for large national and regional dairy corporation survey . . . 97 6. Questionnaire sent to large national and regional dairy corporations . . . 98 vi INTRODUCTION The progress and even the survival of the dairy industry depends upon the technical ability and leadership provided by trained dairy technology graduates. A serious problem seems to exist today regarding the shortage of trained technicians, yet dynamic changes and new develop— ments in the dairy industry offer greater opportunities for many more graduates. Each new technological development of competing food industries will continually challenge the dairy industry to- originate new methods in production, processing, and merchan- dising. Consequently dairy technologists are necessary not only to meet these challenges but also to solve daily plant problems. The increase of automation demands attention for Optimum utilization of machinery, accurate production sched- uling, and the proper function and integration of all compo— nents in the system. Employees need thorough instruction in the care and operation of this equipment. Long distance hauling has broadened the competition from other food companies. Supervising tranSportation of raw milk and finished products is complicated by the necessity to preserve quality, lower handling costs, and observe intra— and interstate commerce regulations. Dairies depend upon the scientifically trained employee to direct quality control laboratories, and estab- lish and maintain housekeeping and sanitation procedures in compliance with public health regulations. Research and development activities require extensive training and imag~ ination to provide new products for a company‘s competitive strategy. Higher production costs and lower profit margins have increased the pressure to reduce plant losses and increase the general efficiency. With these problems the dairy industry will undoubt- edly require the knowledge and skills of many more peOple trained in dairy technology to serve in leadership capac- ities than previously. However the decline in population growth rate between 1920 and 1940 has decreased the number of available men in the middle managerial group, ages 25 to 45. Consequently, the dairy industry will have to seek ways to alleviate this shortage. University dairy technology departments have been the principal source of technically trained personnel for the industry. Enrollment shortages would have a serious effect on the industry, and would require alternatives to develOp technically trained men. Company training programs usually are costly, and the readjustment of skills and work habits to approximate a dairy graduate‘s level of competence may be a lengthy process. Actually there are few good sub— stitutes for a college trained dairy technologist where such a person is Specifically needed. A foreman or plant super- intendent may not necessarily need a college degree, but the plant manager will have to possess managerial abilities such as technical skills and problem awareness generally acquired through a college education. Dairy companies compete with other food companies and dairy and food supply firms for the dairy technologists that become available. Technologists may also be in demand for jobs with trade associations, health departments, agri- cultural agencies, and private, governmental, and academic research laboratories. In view of these trends, the dairy industry should take appropriate steps to assure itself of an adequate sup— ply of trained personnel, or face serious consequences. Thus, the purpose of this study is to determine the supply and demand for trained dairy technologists, and if shortages are found to exist, to investigate ways and means of allevi— ating the problems that result. The following are definitions of terms used in this study: A technically trained person is one who successfully completes a program in the science, technology or engineering of dairy products which leads to a Bachelor of Science degree at an accredited university, or earns its equivalent by other means. Dairy technology is the industrial phase of the dairy industry pertaining specifically to the procurement, processing, sales and distribution of milk and its products. Training may include emphasis on the application of scien— tific disciplines in the physical, chemical and microbiolog— ical characteristics of dairy foods, and the principles of business. Food technology is the application of scientific disciplines to the chemical, physical, and microbiological behavior of food products. Training in business principles may be included. Food science pg£_§g applies the interdisciplinary sciences of chemistry, biochemistry, mathematics, physics, and biology to foods. REVIEW OF LITERATURE Numerous references were found in the literature on labor trends, the effects of automation on employment, edu- cational trends, and the scarcity of managerial personnel. Growth Trend in the Dairy Industry Anastos (3) reported a 20 percent decrease in dairy plants between 1958 and 1963, but the total dollar sales for the period increased 10 percent. Independent dairies in the United States have been disappearing at a rate of 200 per year. An official of the National Independent Dairies Association reported approximately 2,000 independent fluid milk plants with five or more routes in the United States in 1965. These comments are typical of the trend in plant numbers since the end of World War II. Guerra (30) reported a plant in Champaign, Illinois that replaced seven ineffi- cient smaller plants. Another plant in Woodstock, Illinois is capable of handling over 2,000,000 pounds of raw milk per day (4). Rippen, Juers, and Murray (45) reported a similar trend for dairies in Michigan, noting that 572 plants sold milk in 1950; this number decreased to 231 plants in 1963. Between 1950 and 1963, 79 percent of the smaller dairies (less than 1,000,000 pounds of milk processed per year) went out of business. They predicted a continued decrease to 35 plants by 1980 caused by the economies in large volume operations. Juers and McMillan (37) concluded that the improve— ments in processing techniques, distribution, and the chang- ing market structure of retail outlets have encouraged the trend to fewer, larger, more diversified plants in Michigan. The high investment in automated equipment is feasible only for large volume processing operations. Factors such as less frequent, larger sized deliveries and lower tranSpor— tation costs on better highways have also encouraged large scale operations. Similar industry—wide trends in plant numbers and size have been reported by Nielsen (44), Tracy (51), and Gould (27). In a 1963 survey of 3,005 plants, Milk Dealer (13) found 31 percent were multiple product plants, and 69 percent were single product plants. The reasons given for the trend to single product plants were greater demand, high labor costs, high equipment costs, require- ments for a sufficient volume for automated equipment, and the impossibility of automating production lines for all products. \J In a survey of Michigan dairies, Juers and McMillan (37) noted the opposite; with the concentration to fewer plants there was a trend to process a variety of products. This diversification may be a result of increased concentra- tion at the retail level where the ability to provide a wide range of dairy products is a necessary condition of Opera— tion. No data were given to support a general trend to processing more products in the plant. These two opposite opinions may be related to the economic growth of an organization. Assume that a dairy makes high quality products and has a growing demand for its goods. It may eXpand its product lines to take advantage of the market demand. If this dairy finds heavy sales in one product it may Specialize in production of that item and purchase other dairy products; it may produce and sell only the one item; or it may separate production facilities and operate a specialty plant and a multiple product plant. Trends in the Labor Force Several factors influence the supply and demand for Skilled and technically trained labor. These factors are the age distribution and size of the labor force, the skills and occupational distribution, the effects of automation on employment, and the increase in educational levels in the labor force. The Monthly Labor Review (8) eXpected the labor force to grow at an average rate of 1,250,000 workers per year between 1960 and 1970. A writer for the Occupational Outlook Quarterly (7) estimated that our expanding popula— tion would increase the labor force by 12,600,000 between 1960 and 1970 with an eXpected 93,000,000 workers by 1975. During the 1960‘s the labor force will be greatly influenced by the addition Of 6,000,000 workers under age 25. The civilian labor force is becoming younger due to the greater proportion of young people in the population (15). A Labor Department statistician (6) predicted sig- nificant changes in industrial distribution Of employment from 1960 to 1975 due to consumer preferences, business in~ vestment, government expenditures, advances in technology, new products, new industries, and changing natural resources. With an increase in the numbers of persons employed in pro— fessional, technical, managerial, clerical, sales, and ser- vice occupations, the effect will be a rising demand for workers with high levels of education, and a reduction of employment opportunities for the unskilled. Greenberg and Weinberg (28) concluded that the American worker will need a greater range of adaptability in the years ahead, thus underscoring the need for broad educa— tion and training. Increased training might enable a worker to take advantage of job Openings in new industries. Taylor (48) predicted continuing rapid growth between 1960 and 1970 in numbers of white collar jobs, smaller growth in blue collar occupations, fast growth among service workers, but a further decline among farmers and farm laborers. The increasing need for skilled personnel was noted by several authorities. Personnel executives surveyed by Chernick and Hill (19) reported difficulty in recruiting skilled craftsmen, technicians, and professional peOple. They reported no problem in recruiting for starting level jobs requiring mostly unskilled labor. Two—thirds of the reSpondentS had difficulty recruiting in areas requiring high levels Of education, i.e., a master% or doctor% degree. Auman (14) quoted 1962 Labor Department estimates that employ- ment Of professional and technical manpower would increase 40 percent in the next decade. Employment of managerial and skilled employees is eXpected to increase 25 percent while unskilled will decrease 20 percent. The paradox in the labor situation in the United States has been an increasing need for skilled labor (often in short supply) with a concurrent unemployment problem due to workers diSplaced by automation, and the presence of large numbers Of unemployed high school graduates. Some of the displaced and unskilled workers can be retrained - others cannot. However, Time (5) recently reported unemployment has decreased to 4.3 percent of the civilian labor force in October 1965. 10 Another Time article (11) cited Labor Department estimates that 35,000 workers lose or change their jobs weekly because of automation. However, installation Of com— puters in some industries has required so many new Skills that the unemployment level for those industries has hardly changed. Clague (20) pointed out that if the total output of the economy increases as much as productivity, then dis- placed workers will be reabsorbed in the production Of more goods and services. Cohen (21) outlined the broad effects Of technology on employment: areas of application Of labor saving devices, the demands for peOple in certain occupations, the creation Of new jobs, and the problem of worker readjustment. The issue of retraining displaced workers is still a problem. PrOSpects for reemployment depend upon the general state Of business conditions and personal characteristics of the job seeker such as age, sex, race, education, and mobility. A staff writer for DuPont Magazine (10) estimated current industrial spending for training programs was about $ 18,000,000,000 per year, an increase of nearly 80 percent during the past decade. This cost is eXpected to mount to $ 25,000,000,000 per year by 1970. The need for effective job training is of national concern, and a major Objective of the 1965 Federal Job Corps Program. NO Similar training costs were found for the dairy industry. 11 Dairy employees have also been affected by automa— tion. Hall (31) stated that automation increased plant pro~ ductivity five times in the last 30 years. From 1925 to 1930 productivity was 25 to 30 gallons of product handled per man—hour of labor; in 1960 it was 120 gallons per man— hour. As dairy plants decrease in number, the employees who are released may subsequently find employment in other dairies that are expanding. Fewer dairies does not neces— sarily mean less need for skilled employees. In 1961, Thom (49) urged dairy managers to plan 5 to 10 years ahead to reduce human relations problems connected with declining numbers Of plant jobs, and to anticipate fewer but techni— cally trained employees. He stressed the adoption Of train- ing programs for upgrading employees to operate automated equipment. These data are refuted by several authorities who predict a greater need for managers and skilled employ- ees in dairy plants. In a 1965 article (50) Thom himself suggests the greater need for skilled employees. Apparently the increasing shortage Of skilled labor caused him to reevaluate his previous statement. The influence of automation on employee skills was mentioned by several authors. Kruger (41) maintained there was no clear evidence that automation raises the skill level of the work force. Automation influences dairy plant man— agement by demanding better training and a higher level of managerial skills. Tracy (51) stated that automation requires 12 better trained, more highly skilled personnel. He felt that the dairy industry would look to graduates in engineering and other non-dairy areas for above average students. Education and the Labor Force In the search for technically trained labor, the dairy industry may be aided by the increased educational levels of the labor force. The uptrend in worker education was noted by Johnston (35) who reported that experience alone carries less weight now than previously. If material rewards are used as a measure, four years investment in a high school diploma is worth more than 20 years Of work eXperience. An article in Time (9) showed the trend to more education after high school. In 1965 the Span Of education Of the average job holder exceeded 12 years. Department of Labor Secretary W. Willard Wirtz said, ”A person needs 14 years of education tO compete with the machine.” The 1960 Census of the POpulation (52) reported that 10 years was the median years of school completed by dairy workers. Gardner (25) pointed out that the demands in the better positions would require considerable training beyond high school, and that the rapid change in dairy jobs had increased the need for the college educated man. 13 Time (12) observed that in 1965, 71 percent of the nation's l7 year—olds graduated from high school, and 30 percent of the college age pOpulation was in school. Huddleston (34) reported an enrollment of 4,500,000 students in the United States working for a bachelorE degree in 1963; a 7.7 percent increase from 1962. The Labor Department (53) estimated the number of bachelors degrees awarded annually would be 80 percent greater in 1970 than 1961. According to the United States Office Of Education, the number Of masterg degrees conferred annually may reach 150,000 in 1970, and doctorates may exceed 18,000. Geyer (26) noted that agricultural college officials are reviewing their Obligations to educate not only rural youth but urban students as well. They face serious issues on declining enrollment, maintaining entrance standards, consolidation Of courses and departments, the Obsolescence of manual skills, and the increasing need for breadth in education. Decisions made in these areas could affect dairy technology if such programs were consolidated into food tech— nology, or eliminated due to low enrollment and little indus— try support. Evidence of an international problem in dairy school enrollment was presented by Kosikowski (40) who listed the shortage of students as the most important problem in dairy technology education in North America for the next few years. l4 Solberg (47) reported recruiting problems common tO dairy industries in several countries, and Kiermeier (39) noted the difficulty of establishing a basic, universal dairy technology curriculum. Crossley (23) suggested that the need for technically trained dairy personnel is related to the sophistication of the dairy industry of a particular country. Regarding the United States situation, Coulter (22) cited a lack of interest, subtle parental pressures, urbanization of school systems, and a possible decline in the status Of the field of agriculture for the decrease in enrollment in dairy technology. Anastos (1) hoped that the emphasis on scientific aSpects in dairy technology could prove to be the stimulus for renewed student interest in the curriculum. In 1962, Anastos (2) found that many dairy technol- ogy departments graduated a small number of students, and few anticipated an increase in enrollment within the next few years. Departments were unable to satisfy all requests from industry for trained men, but the students available received several job Offers. Among the causes listed for the Shortage were a ”hayseed” image of dairy schools, inade— quate high school counseling on dairy technology careers, farm oriented curricula, and industry indifference. In regard to industry indifference, Drohan (24) reported sev- eral college placement directors felt that the dairy indus— tries were not active recruiters, had no ”image,” and were 15 not competitive in salary with other industries. This information was based on interviews with only a few univer— sities and may not be truly representative of dairy industry recruiting. Herrington (33) found the average number needed per year to justify the teaching of Specialized programs in dairy technology was 11.5 graduates. However, the average number who completed these courses during the three years of Herrington‘s study was only 5.4 students. Another survey revealed that of the 33 schools granting a bachelorE degree in dairy technology in June 1962, 19 would grant less than four degrees. Herrington suggested consolidation Of food and dairy technology departments, discontinuation of dairy technology in small departments, and interstate cooperation to establish regional dairy technology schools to alleviate the situation. Worrilow (56) found that graduate enrollment in dairy technology in September 1961 increased 56 percent from the same period in 1960; from 204 to 319. However, in 1965, Josephson (36) cited the decreasing number Of dairy technol- Ogy undergraduates as one reason for the low supply of grad- uate students. The demands for these students are growing faster than the supply. Several authorities discussed non—degree training of dairy personnel to upgrade their skills. Nielsen (44) l6 endorsed the idea that the dairy industry should actively support educational activities by providing scholarships to qualified students, and adequate training facilities for employees. To aid the development of plant personnel, Thom (50) felt that university Short courses on technical Operatw ing skills would help fill the need for trained dairymen. Worrilow (56) suggested a 2-year associate degree in dairy» ing to supplement a 5—year combination bachelor-master‘s degree in dairy technology. He also advised updating and revising the instruction, depth and proliferation Of dairy processing courses. Gregory (29) emphasized the importance of short courses, conferences and newsletters in dairy train~ ing programs. Differences in training non-degree dairy work~ ers in foreign countries compared to the United States were reported by Bradfield (16). Generally he found better facil— ities and greater interest by the industry abroad in short courses, work-school training programs, apprenticeships, and l and 2-year technical dairying institutes. Demands for Technical and Managerial Personnel Taylor (48) noted that the increase in white collar jobs reflected rapid expansion in the service industries, a growing demand for research personnel, and an increasing need for health and education service people. l7 Mott (43) reported 16 percent Of the 3,500,000 immi— grants entering the United States from 1947 to 1961 were in skilled professional and technical occupations, whereas only 9 percent Of the peOple in the nation‘s labor force were employed in these categories. Thirty-seven percent of all immigrants who entered in 1961 were between the ages 25 to 44. If this trend continues throughout the 1960's, immi- grants could ease the expected shortage of technicians and professional personnel in the 35 to 44 age group. The Department of Immigration and Naturalization did not main— tain a record of immigrants with dairy experience. Gould (27) concluded that the complex dairy would require a continuous supply of better trained men. He stated that the success a company achieves in maintaining its strength in quality and depth of its foremen depends upon the basic philOSOphies and policies of the organization. Thom (50) stated that there is a pressing need for employees who are able to work with their hands, and who are specifi— cally trained in some technical Skill for the Operation Of mechanized dairy equipment. The dearth of managerial personnel has serious con- sequences for the dairy industry. Hartman (32) predicted a shortage of managerial talent during the next several decades due to a rising demand for executives, but a low supply of men in the key age group 35 to 44. Cherne (18) stated that l8 managers will be the most critically needed business resource in the next few years. Williams (54) estimated 500,000 middle managers are switching jobs annually because there are many job opportu— nities and few qualified men available. With this high job mobility, Wishart (55) stressed that businesses must pay more attention to holding and attracting competent peOple. Mann (42) suggested forecasting managerial require~ ments 5 years ahead. This forecast would be based on sales, costs, and expected profits, and influenced by the anticipated growth rate of the national economy. Implica- tions of this forecast should be examined in terms of the corporate organizational structure. Finally, managerial training programs Should be planned to fill the vacancies foreseen. To be fully effective, Cassidy (17) stated that management deveIOpment programs should take the form Of a company—wide plan which regularly determines the extent and depth of human resources, and draws upon recruitment, selec~ tion, and training programs to make the best use of avail— able talent. Smith (46) noted the increasing importance Of top - management to develop key subordinates. Pointing out that 50 percent of the dairy companies in operation 10 years ago are now out Of business, he stressed that continued growth in the dairy industry would require superior performance from management. METHODS Mail surveys were used tO provide broader coverage of possible respondents, to shorten the time necessary for gathering and summarizing the data, and to reduce the cost that might be involved in other methods. The questionnaires were carefully worded to minimize ambiguities and make re~ Sponding easier. Questions with single word answers aided in summarizing the data, and Open end questions allowed respondents to express personal views. When appropriate, the same question was presented to each of the three groups to elicit similarities or differences of Opinion. Univer— sity dairy technology departments were surveyed to determine the supply of dairy technology students available. Michigan dairies, and national and regional dairy companies were sur~ veyed to determine the industry's demand for these graduates. Survey of University Departments with a Dairy Technology Curriculum The survey was designed to determine the trend in enrollment and number of graduates in dairy technology from 1961 to 1965. A list of 56 dairy technology departments in the United States and Canada was prepared from the index of 19 20 the 1963 Dairy Industries Catalog published by the Olsen Publishing Company. The questionnaire (p. 91, Appendix) was sent to the dairy technology department chairman or a profes~ sor in the area related to dairying at each university on June 14, 1965. Survey Of Michigan Dairy Plants To ascertain the demand for college and non—college trained personnel on the state level, a questionnaire was mailed to 301 dairy plants in Michigan. This mailing list was compiled from files Of currently licensed dairy plants kept by the Michigan Department Of Agriculture, Dairy Divi- sion, and a similar list printed by the Michigan Dairy Foods Association. A questionnaire (p. 93, Appendix) and reply envelope was mailed on October 15, 1965. Survey Of Large National and Regional Dairy Corporations To estimate the national demand for dairy technology graduates, a third questionnaire was sent to 23 large dairy food corporations in the United States. The companies were selected on the basis of size with the intent to include those which employed most of the nation's dairy workers. Addresses were gathered from the College Placement Annual and past correspondence. The questionnaires (pm 98, Appendix) were mailed November 1, 1965. 21 Data Tables A weighted score was used in tabulating Tables 3, 5, and 7. That score was derived by assigning a value to each ranking. For example, in a series Of five choices the num~ ber Of first place votes was multiplied by 5, second by 4, third by 3, fourth by 2, and fifth by l. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Survey of University Departments with a Dairy Technology Curriculum Of the 56 questionnaires mailed to universities in the United States and Canada, 46 or 82 percent were com— pleted and returned. However, of the 46 returns, only 35 universities reported offering a degree in dairy technology, seven did not Offer a degree in dairy technology, but had a combined food and dairy technology curriculum, and four universities did not Offer a curriculum in dairy technology or food technology. Not all questions were answered in a usable form, thus changing total reSponses for each question. Paragraph numbers correSpond to question numbers of the sur- vey presented in the Appendix. 1. Thirty—eight departments answering Question 1 re— ported 511 students enrolled in the 4—year program during the 1964-1965 school year. Nineteen departments each re- ported less than nine undergraduates for a total of 87 stu- dents. The other 19 departments accounted for 424 students; 10 departments enrolled 307 students. The average was 13.5 undergraduates in the 38 universities having dairy 22 23 technology curricula (about 3.4 per class). Some of the universities do not require a student to declare a major until the junior year. Enrollment in dairy technology seems to be continun ing the decline noted by other authorities. Dairy technol- ogy departments in 29 universities responded to both this survey and the Anastos (2) survey in 1962. In 1962 these departments reported 809 undergraduates; in 1965 the same departments reported 319 undergraduates. Allowing for the possibility that the 1962 survey may have included some dairy husbandry students, the decrease still represents a drastic reduction in dairy technology enrollment. Unpub» lished data by Kelly (38) also shows a decrease in enroll- ment in 20 dairy technology departments from 1957 to 1962. In view of the high demand for dairy technologists revealed by the surveys in this study, 511 undergraduates is a dangerv ously low supply of dairy technology students. 2. The 39 departments answering Question 2 reported 118 students working on a master% program in dairy technology. One department had no graduate program, and four reported no masterk candidates in the 1964—1965 School year. The aver~ age number of masterE candidates was 3.0 per reSponding department while the range was from 0 to 21. Thirty-five departments reported 76 doctoral candidates in 1964-1965. 24 Four departments had no doctoral program. The average num— ber Of doctoral candidates was 2.2 per reSponding department, while the range was from 0 to 12. The total number of grad— uate students enrolled was 267 (this includes one department reporting a combined total of 73 students in both master% and doctoral programs). Josephson (36) noted a general trend for graduate enrollment to increase as post graduate work becomes more common among bachelorh degree graduates. This withholds bachelorE degree graduates from the labor market temporarily, but hopefully prepares them for later jobs requiring greater knowledge. In dairy technology however, with decreasing num— bers of bachelors degree graduates, Opportunities in indus- try frequently lure the potential graduate student away from advanced studies. Any program to increase graduate enroll- ment in dairy technology must first be concerned with in— creasing undergraduate enrollment. 3. Thirty-nine departments reported the numbers of dairy technology degrees granted between 1962 and 1965, and nine departments reported the number of food technology degrees for this period. Table 1 shows the number Of dairy technology degrees has declined in this 4 year period while food technology degrees have increased. This may be due to the increased number of departments which have food 25 m.o OH we N n.m w.v ovH om m mooa H.o ma mm m n.m o.m omH mm m MOOH m.oa ma mo 0 m.m m.m HNH mm m «OOH m.HH 0H oma o o.m m.v HHH mm 0H mooa own :ma mmmuwmo mcfipuommmfl 6mm :ma mmouwma wcfiqudmm mmumzomuw Haw» num>< loo: mo .02 .mumoa aum>< loo: mo .62 .mammn Oz spa: mo .62 . mo .oz .mpmmn >woaocnooe poom >wOHOOnOOH >uHmQ . O>fim3Hucfl mooaumooa .>wOHocnomv poow paw >wOHocnOOp >Hfimo ca Ompcmum mmmuwmp Muoamnumm .a OHDmH 26 technology programs or which have included dairy technology under the food technology degree. The rise in food technol— ogy degrees may also reflect the food industry's need for technically trained personnel. Each year from 1962 to 1965, over 80 percent Of the departments granted less than seven bachelorS degrees. In 1965, 34 departments granted 68 degrees. In 1964, 35 depart- ments granted 80 degrees. In 1963, 31 departments granted 76 degrees, and in 1962, 32 departments granted only 83 degrees in dairy technology. The decreasing number Of bachelorS degrees granted (or increase of "no graduates”) may be partially attributed to the incorporation of dairy tethnology into a food technol- ogy curriculum, and thus to a decline in students majoring strictly in dairy technology. This is supported by the answers to Questions 1 and 7, and by the results of the other two surveys in this study. Other reasons for this decline may be a general lack Of interest in this field. With fewer dairy farms in the United States, fewer rural youths are encouraged to continue their interest in dairying through the dairy technology programs. The disap- pearance Of small dairies in local communities, plus the increased Opportunities for young people, diSplaces dairy— ing as a possible career choice. Without the example Of a modern, efficient dairy to emphasize the vitality Of the 27 industry, students may not become aware of career possibil— ities in dairy technology. Visitors to an automated plant may interpret the absence of many employees as a lack of opportunities also. In urban areas the dairy is taken for granted; few people are concerned about the production of dairy foods. High school students receive information on many appealing careers, but apparently little information on Opportunities in dairy technology. Comments from industry and academic personnel indicate that high school counselors are not aware of these Opportunities and students have a misconception of the duties and importance of a dairy tech- nologist. The absence Of well-planned, imaginative material and publicity to stimulate the student‘s interest in dairy technology has perpetuated the decline in enrollment. The enthusiasm of departmental administrators in publicizing their dairy technology curriculum, and in pro- viding adequate facilities along with a well qualified faculty also affects enrollment. 4. Forty-one departments presented their expected en- rollment for 1966 to 1970. Nineteen department heads (46.3%) thought enrollment would increase, 18 (43.9%) said enroll- ment would remain the same, and 4 (9.8%) said enrollment would decrease. 28 It is difficult tO eXplain why 19 department officials thought their enrollment in dairy technology would increase when the trend for several years has shown decreasing enroll- ments and fewer graduates. The expected increase is not entirely eXplained by the possibly greater appeal of com- bined dairy and food technology curriculum. Four depart— ments with such programs expected an increase in enrollment but not necessarily among dairy technology majors.. Seven departments (probably aided by a good academic reputation) eXpected increases through curriculum revisions, increased publicity and recruitment. However, eight smaller depart- ments also expected enrollment to increase but gave no rea- son for their prediction. From the comments of these eight departments to Question 6, a decrease in enrollment would be expected. Some were in states with few dairy plants. Their graduates left the state for jobs. In the absence of sup— porting evidence, such claims of an expected increase in enrollment in these eight departments must be challenged. Seven departments which reported enrollment would remain the same may have based their estimate on the low demand (no shortage) for dairy technology graduates in their state. This is inferred from their answers to Question 6. Ten departments stated the shortage was serious but either gave no reason, had no success in recruitment, or cited a lack of publicity and industry cooperation for their 29 estimates Of "no change” in enrollment. The four departments thatpmedicted a decrease in enrollment either gave no reason, or cited low job potential, recruiting. and a lack of industry help in 5. Forty—two departments gave the average number of job Openings reported per bachelor% degree graduate in 1964, and 33 departments gave the average number of Openings per mas— tefls and doctoral graduate. The number of Openings were divided into Seven categories as shown in Table 2. As an average, each bachelor% degree graduate in June 1964 received notice Of five job Openings. Table 2. Average number Of reported job openings per bachelork, mastefs, and doctoral graduate, 1964 No. Of Dairy Technology Departments ReSponding NO,Of Job Bachelofs Master% and DoctorE Openings Degree Degrees l to 3 15 16 4 t0 6 17 9 7 to 9 5 4 10 to 12 3 2 13 to 15 1 O 16 to 18 0 0 19 to 21 1 O 30 "Job Openings” include both definite job Offers and the Opportunities for employment. The average was calcu- lated by dividing the total number Of jobs offered per department in 1964 by the 121 graduates for 1964. No attempt was made to examine the quality of these job Openings. Graduate students appear to have received notice of only one to three job Openings. Many dairies, even large plants, cannot afford the higher salaries graduate students generally desire, or provide work of a calibre suited to them. Some companies do not Specify a graduate student when recruiting, but outline certain educational or experience requirements. Graduate students on leave of absence from a company may be obligated to return to that company. Other graduates may have previous job commitments or wish to remain at the university to teach or conduct research. Because their training is Specialized, graduates in dairy technology may compete with graduates in other disciplines for jobs in large dairy corporations. Many graduates are foreign stu- dents, committed in advance to positions at home. 6. Of the 44 departments that answered Question 6, 32 (72.7%) stated the shortage of dairy technology students was serious or very serious. Only 11 (25.0%) reported there was no shortage, and one department gave a ”don't know” reply. The seriousness Of the shortage can be judged from the com- ments received: 31 We can use twice as many graduates. We are unable to recruit enough students to fill job Openings. Many graduates are going for advanced degrees. Small dairies won‘t meet the wage scale for college men. Had more requests last year than the previous five. Jobs have exceeded students for the last 10-15 years. Companies have stopped calling us. They know we have no students available. Industry is making adjustments by training their own personnel. Graduates from other fields are getting the surplus jobs. Fifteen requests - filled none. NO success - in correcting the problem. Have had 10; 20; 75; 100 requests per year. Those departments which reported no Shortage were generally in states with few dairy plants where the grad- uates available were enough to fill the needs within the state. One department reported creamery consolidations had released a sufficient supply of trained men in the state. Another department stated there was no serious shortage because dairies were not competitive with other industries, and graduates took jobs in non-dairy positions. This state- ment must be questioned because industry personnel from this state have reported a serious shortage of dairy technologists and have increased salaries for them. The fact that a grad- uate takes a non-dairy job does not lessen the need for a dairy technologist. 32 7. Twenty-three (54.7%) of the department heads answering this question said a curriculum revision had occurred within the preceding .2 years. Sixteen (38.0%) reported nO essen- tial change, and three (7.3%) indicated a revision in pro— gress. The extent of the curriculum revisions can be inter- preted from the following remarks (the figures indicate frequency of mention): Included dairy technology in food technol— ogy curriculum . . . . . 10 Combined beginning courSes in dairy .and fOod technology . . . . . . . . . . 7 Offered more Options, e.g., science, prOduc— tion, and business . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Less products oriented; more principles. . . 4 Courses kept flexible to meet industry's needs and student‘s ability. . . . . . . 4 Courses taught every other year. 2 Offered more courses in: business, food science, humanities, mathematics, economics, engineering, chemistry, microbiology . . . . . . . . 1 Discontinued two-year program because of low demand . . . . . . l Dropped dairy curriculum entirely in 1960.. . 1 Many dairy technology departments have found the instruction of a declining number Of students tOO inefficient to continue the dairy technology curriculum. Dairy technol- ogy and food technology courses were combined mainly to reduce costs. Some schools have included these programs under ”food science.” Generally the food science program emphasizes the application Of scientific principles to the processing of several commodities, with less time Spent on any one commodity. Students may Specialize to a limited 33 extent through elective product courses or select Options in business. Herrington (33) stated that course consolidation seriously lessened the time necessary to instruct students in dairy techniques. Thus, while food science training might enable a student to seek employment in a variety Of corporations, those looking for a qualified Specialist may not be satisfied with this training. While graduates of other fields could be employed by dairies, a trained dairy technologist is still needed. If companies eXpect dairy technology departments to provide technical Specialists, they will have to intensify their efforts to attract more students into dairy technology curricula, and recommend training to suit their needs. 8. Of the 44 departments heads answering Question 8, 34 (77.3%) said dairy technology graduates were competitive in salary with graduates Of other departments, but 10 (22.7%) said they were not. A few reSpondents thought the low sal- aries Offered by dairies impedes recruitment and discourages skilled men from entering the industry. Most reSpondents however, indicated that dairy technologists received start- ing salaries above the average Of agricultural graduates although they were less well paid than engineers. The higher starting salary Of the dairy technologist compared to the agricultural graduate may be due to a lower quality 34 student in general agriculture curricula. While there are exceptions, the more capable rural youths seem to be enter— ing more of the ”glamourous" occupations, and are less con- cerned with returning to the farm. This is consistent with the decline in farm population, and is the result of programs tO provide better education and job opportunities for rural youth. The ability to remain competitive in salary levels further suggests that dairy technologists are in Short sup— ply. Because wages are essentially determined by supply and demand they tend to increase as firms actively bid for the low supply Of needed personnel. 9. Thirty—nine departments answered the question of replacing dairy technology graduates with graduates of other disciplines. Twenty—four department Officials provided ranked choices, seven said "no," and eight commented without rank- ing their choice. The results are listed in Table 3. Other departments mentioned were food science, liberal arts, mathe— matics, and dairy husbandry. Although modern dairies can profitably employ men with Specialized knowledge, the implication is that dairies still need trained dairy technologists for management and fOr production positions. ReSpondents may have been influ- enced by numerous requests for supervisory personnel in 35 m m w H xcmm o o m o, H o o m o .nHm w v NH o m m m o m .nuv em mH wH o m w m o m .Oum om 0H m em v o v m o .Ocm mH mm m mm m m n H HH .HmH >mOHOHD mcHuomc >upmH mmoc OsHm> >mOHOHn wcHuOm: >uHmH mmmc Emma IOHOHE :chm .5650 uHmnm xcmm :OHOHE -Hmcm [56:0 uHmsm mmuOOm pmHanmz mcHucommOm mpcmeHumdoa smOHoznOoH >uHmQ mo .Oz meHmoHocnomp >uHmO How momma HHHmHsm OH mmcHHdHomHo HOEHO scum mOHMSOmuw now mcoHHmmmwsm .m OHan 36 ranking business first. The second place ranking of micro- biology reflects the emphasis placed on quality control by the departments. 10. Suggestions for alleviating the Shortage Of dairy technology students were Offered by 41 departments: Strengthen high school recruiting, eSpe- cially urban schools; maintain closer contact with high school counselors and parents. . . . . . . 23 Industry should do a better jOb .Of acquainting high school students with the dairy industry; better publicity on the importance of dairying. . . . . . . 22 Better salaries, jobs, promotions; raise starting salaries. . . . . . . 16 Improve the industry' 5 public image; clarify the image and duties Of the occupation to more accurately reflect the importance Of dairy technology . . . . 13 More scholarships; better in-plant training; interest more high calibre students . . . More associate degree training; national magazine ads; college Open house days. Strengthen the program to fit the indus- try' 5 need . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Stress scientific training . . . . More positive attitude by dairy leaders that well trained dairy technologists are not expendable . . . . . . . . . 1 Better long range planning to hire trained men; provide more financial aid by industry; eliminate small dairy departments; consolidate courses; estab- lish regional dairy Schools; provide LA) HNN summer training for students . . . . . . 1 Create a truly professional status for key men. . . . . . . . . 1 Industry should recOgnize the value of educating its employees. . . . . . . . . . l 37 Accelerated high school recruiting, more publicity, and the creation Of a favorable image for the industry were three of the major suggestions to increase enrollment in dairy technology. The comments suggest that recruiting be Specifically directed to high quality students in urban high schools through sources which influence their occupa— tional choices. Extensive publicity to aid recruiting Should be applied locally through individual dairies, and nationally by such mass media as magazine ads. In recruiting, the non— farm aSpect of dairying should be stressed as well as the options in science or business. Although the industry does not suffer from an excep- tionally unfavorably image, neither does it benefit from strongly favorable impressions. One barrier to recruitment seems to be the lack of any image. The public image Of the industry conditions a student‘s receptivity to dairy tech— nology as a career. Unfavorable impressions coming from poor community relations, using milk as a loss leader, or the controversial health claims involving dairy products may discourage a student‘s interest in dairy technology. Capi— talizing on the strong points Of the industry, as new product development, nutritional research, company diversification, the role of the industry in promoting world health and in alleviating food shortages, may stimulate interest in dairy technology. The vocational status ascribed to the dairy 38 industry by a student’s peers, teachers, parents and coun- selors also affects career choice. Even if recruiting efforts succeeded in raising enrollments in universities for the fall of 1966, it would be 1970 before any graduates would be available. Dairy plants will face this Shortage of trained manpower for at least the next 4 years. Increased Selective Service draft calls which occurred during this study, further lessened the number of men available for the industry. Survey of Michigan Dairy Plants Of the 301 questionnaires mailed, 151 or 50.1 percent were returned. Of those returned, 126 were usable. 1. Of the 106 plants answering Question 1, 53 (50.0%) reported a moderate shortage of dairy technology students, 44 (41.5%) reported a serious shortage, and 9 (8.5%) reported no shortage. Thus, over 90 percent Of the dairies found a shortage Of college trained dairy technologists. This agrees with the findings from the university survey. 2. The question on the difficulty Of finding adequately trained men was answered by 121 plants. Of those reSponding, 79 (65.3%) reported having difficulty in finding trained 39 personnel, 29 (24.0%) reported no difficulty, and 13 (10.7%) gave a ”don't know” reply. The difficulty in finding adequately trained men may be attributed (as comments in this survey indicate) to the shortage Of skilled labor in many parts of Michigan at the time of the survey. Men can receive high wages in automo- bile factories, thus draining the state of skilled labor. Dairies often cannot meet the high wages Offered by other industries, and some plants saw little hOpe Of increasing wages. Smaller plants with few employees generally had less difficulty in finding adequately trained help because Of low employee turnover, and the less extensive skills needed. These dairies were probably in areas where there is less competition for labor. 3. Of the 115 plants answering Question 3, 60 (52.2%) hired dairy technology graduates for certain positions, 35 (30.4%) never hired dairy technologists, and 20 (17.4%) did not give dairy technologists preference for skilled jobs. From these answers and the results Of Question 4, it seems over 50 percent of the responding plants had definite, mostly supervisory jobs in mind for dairy technologists. The plants which gave no preference to dairy technologists were generally small and did not recruit college graduates. The 30 percent thatnever hired dairy technologists were 40 small, family owned plants that apparently did not need, or could not afford a dairy technologist. Several respondents said they didn‘t know what the dairy technology graduate had to Offer; many preferred to train their own men. 4. The 58 plants responding to Question 4 listed the following jobs to which dairy technologists would be assigned (figures indicate frequency of mention): Manager (Office; plant; production). . . . . 26 Supervisor (plant; production) . . . . 23 Laboratory (superintendent; technician). . . 20 Quality control inSpector. . . . . . . . . . 10 Foreman. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Sales and marketing. . . . . . . . . 8 Machine Operators. . . . . . . 8 Accounting, purchasing, general office 6 Research and develOpment 6 Engineer 3 Trained technician 3 Fieldman 2 Most respondents allocated dairy technologists‘ tal- ents to managerial and scientific tasks. The plants which would use dairy technologists as machine Operators could profit by an eXplanation Of the duties of a dairy technol— ogist, and by training other employees to Operate machinery. 5. On the question Of hiring more dairy technology graduates, 111 plants reSponded. Eighty—six (77.5%)reported, if available, they would hire more dairy technology graduates, but 25 (22.5%) indicated they would not hire more even if graduates were available. 41 Opportunities for employment Of dairy technologists in Michigan were comparable to the high number of job Open— ings reported in the department survey (Question 5). The excess of demand over the supply of dairy technology grad- uates noted in the survey of the departments seems to be confirmed by the survey of Michigan dairies. Those reSpon- dents who would not hire more dairy technologists stated their plant was too small to justify the salary of a trained technician. Others reported an adequate supply Of trained men, had never hired a dairy technologist, or gave no reason for not wanting to hire more. In comparison with the answers to Question 3, most respondents who hired dairy technologists for certain posi- tions said they would hire more. However, 12 plants which gave no preference, and 15 plants which never hired dairy technologists also reported they would hire more graduates if available. Although no reasons were given for these incon- sistencies, one~may infer that these dairies either consid- ered dairy technologists on an equal basis with all other applicants for skilled jobs, or had never hired a dairy technologist but were willing to if conditions were satis— factory. 42 6. One hundred and Sixteen plants answered the question on the adequacy of dairy technology training. Of those, 42 (28.4%) suggested more training in business, 33 (12.3%) pro- posed more training in engineering, 9 (6.1%) mentioned more training in science, 19 (12.8%) considered present training satisfactory, and 45 (30.4%) gave a “don‘t know” reply. These results indicate that those dairy technology departments1flun:are Offering more business and engineering training in revised programs seem to be meeting the needs Of the industry. The fact that 30 percent Of the reSpondentS didn't know if training was adequate implies either they did not hire dairy technology graduates, or they were not famil- iar with the training. A program to acquaint plant managers with the services a dairy technologist can Offer may be help— ful in promoting interest in recruiting. 7. Information on job Openings was reported by 123 plants. The predominance of small plants in Michigan ex- plains the high number Of reSponses, "don't have this type of job.“ Dairies Operated by family members did not hire much outside help; this partially accounts for the high number of responses in the ”no Opening” category. The results are summarized in Table 4. 43 Table 4. ReSponses on the availability Of jobs in 123 Michigan dairy plants from October 1964 to October 1965 Job Job Not Don't Have Type of Job Open Open This Job Supervisory: Plant superintendent 13 69 16 Foreman 24 35 16 Trained technician: Research and develOpment 5 27 52 Laboratory quality control 13 30 31 Skilled operator for: Ice cream 18 36 45 Fluid milk 14 46 28 Cheese and cultured products 15 28 43 Butter 3 24 51 Dry milk 2 25 50 Mix maker ‘ l .. .. Office and sales: Bookkeeper and accountant 26 70 8 Shipping & purchasing agent 4 45 35 Salesman; route sales 29 41 22 Engineer: Electrician 11 41 39 Refrigeration man 11 44 29 Maintenance man 25 45 20 Systems engineer 3 25 47 Assistant plant engineer 1 .. .. Most job Openings were in supervision, machine Opera- tion, sales, bookkeeping, and maintenance. There was a noticeable absence Of research and development and labora- tor}; jobs, probably because small plants either have outside labcaratories do their testing, or do very little work of this 44 nature. This may eXplain why only nine plants in the pre- vious question suggested more scientific training for dairy technologists. The number of plants having no jobs in ice cream, butter, dry milk, and cheese reflects a trend for these products to be produced by fewer, but larger plants (Juers and McMillan, 37). Most plants still processed fluid milk for direct consumption. 8. Of the 117 plants who answered Question 8, 112 (95.7%) stated they were willing to train present employees for skilled jobs in the plant, but five plants (4.3%) reported they would not train employees. This indicates most Mich- igan dairies depend upon at least some in—plant training to upgrade their personnel. Of the 93 plants reSponding to part B, 34 actually ranked their outside sources of skilled personnel, while 59 merely checked their answer. The results are summarized in Table 5. Other sources of employ- ment mentioned were: Generally hire from applications . . . . . . . 12 NeWSpaper and trade journal ads. . . . . . . . 11 Employment agencies. . . . . . 6 Hired by plant Office or home Office; referrals; industry contacts . . . . . . . . 6 45 m m H xcmm HH 4 m H HH 4 m .num oH om mm m m mH SH .Ocm 0 mm em m m HH wH .HmH mmousom mOHcmdsoo .mudma >wOHoc OsHm> mmousom mchmOEOU .mpdmn >onoc xcmm secuo uweuo -suue suHmo scam “mayo “mayo -nume SHHSO >HHmuO>Hca >HHmuO>Hea mmuoom Ompanmz wcHOcOdmmm wpcmHm mo .02 mwcde >uHmO :menOHZ nHH cH mnoh How Hmecowumd OOHHme mo mmuusom .m mHan 46 The narrow margin between dairy technology depart- ments and other companies suggests that dairy plants must depend upon these other areas to fill their needs for skilled personnel. Generally, dairies would prefer to hire dairy technology graduates for jobs requiring their skills, but in their absence other sources must be utilized. Although hir- ing men from other dairies may solve a manpower shortage problem for one dairy, it creates the same problem in another company which then has a vacancy to fill. Companies with good training programs may find their personnel pirated by firms having no training programs. With the noticeable shortage of technically trained personnel, dairies must find ways Of attracting and keeping technical employees. Dairies should not neglect other sources of trained men such as military occupational training centers, techni- cal institutes Or trade schools, and government sponsored training programs. At the time of this study, the Federal Job Corps Program was not training youths for dairy plants. 9. One hundred and fifteen plants reSponded to Question 9. Forty-seven plants (40.9%) rarely or never Offered train- ing programs to employees, 43 plants (37.4%) occasionally Offered training programs, and 25 plants (21.7%) continuously Offered training programs to employees. 47 As eXpected, small family owned dairies rarely or never Offered training programs. Other dairies took advan— tage of university short courses, local school courses, university conference and extension material in providing occasional training. Some plants may have included plant meetings and on-the-job instruction in this category. Larger plants tended to offer training on a continuous basis to laboratory and supervisory personnel. The companies with many employees would logically have more room for advancement where trainees could utilize their training. Some plants included on-the-job training and plant discussions of house- keeping and maintenance in this category. 10. Table 6 is composed of answers supplied by 65 plants on the question Of the purpose, material taught, and jobs affected by company training programs. On-the-job training, short courses, and conferences were the most frequently used methods-of training both supervisory and production person- nel. Sanitation, safety, housekeeping, and machine Opera- tion were topics which concerned general employees and fore— men, while supervisors and managers received additional instruction in inventory control, production scheduling, purchasing, milk composition, and quality control. 48 H mOHHmE N msmuwoua HaHOOQw legume >uHmQ m meon H >pommm H mmmusoo nmsowHU asoum m mmHHamsm mHmmcumo mHmQ pew mHm>Hum paw >HOHSO>2H H mmmusoo m mOHcHHO mmHmm mo Houucoo OOCOOCOdmOuuoo m mweHHOOE >cmdeoo N OHnmcmsmmHmm H HoccOmuOQ H mpemHm m mmoemummcoo m Houucoo >HH >uonuoan umnwo mo musoH >uHmuO>HcD :Hmsv pew :OHH H Hoccomumd H mquOSHHmcH m mHoonow Hanz nHmOQEOO xHHE >Ox uwnpo OHSHHHmcH m mHmsems a mocHH m ooemcmwcsz paw :mEmuom muoaoz Hmumcmw nuso .mxoonxuoz m wcHummchcm m mummcchm H mOHm Hm3mH> m mowusou v eoHumpHcmm m muOHmumdo umnpo new mEHHm concwuxm v mchmmuoum oanumz m .ums 0H wmmusoo uuonm o m2OHpmHOu m cosmmHmm HemsQHscm mo em mchHmuH sass: pew uuo>HuQ mO>HHchOmOHQOm QOnnmnpuco pumsowmcmz m muOmH>umdsm mcH pom: wcH pom: wcH HEMSmH wcH OO>HO>OH IOCOQw muonpoz upcomm mponumz nOcOdm HmHumumz upcomm mcoHHHmom som.oz nom.oz nom.oz nom.oz mpcmHm >uHmO emenOHz >6 Omuowmo msmuwoud mchHmHH .0 OHan 49 11. Question 11 was answered by 102 dairies. Seventy- one plants encouraged their supervisors to attend short courses and conferences, but 24 dairies did not. Fifty dairies encouraged skilled employees to attend these pro- grams, but 35 dairies did not. Sixty-nine dairies reported they paid all or part of the eXpense of sending men to these conferences and short courses, but 22 dairies did not pro— vide financial aid, Of the 51 respondents completing the second part of the question, 36 stated the same employees attended the short courses and conferences, and 15 reported that different employees attend. The results suggest that supervisory personnel are encouraged to attend outside courses and conferences while plant personnel are given company training programs with only occasional outside training. This would be consistent with managerial practices which suggest training the most capable individuals who may in turn train other employees. Low turnover in personnel Of few employees accounts for the same peOple attending outside training programs. Top manage- ment personnel would be expected to attend to learn Of indus- try develOpments. Some plants couldn't Spare their men to attend; others reported employees showed little interest. 12. One hundred and eighteen dairies reported a total Of 10,643 full time employees, or approximately 90 per plant. 50 Although this seems high, larger plants in cities may have Offset the many plants with few employees. 13. Of the 121 dairies answering Question 13, 54 plants (44.6%) stated the number of employees remained constant during the past five years, 34 (28.1%) noted a decrease in employees, and 33 (27.3%) stated the number of employees had increased. As dairy plants in Michigan have grown, they have required more employees to provide eXpanded services. This Offsets the decrease from automation. More salesmen are needed to find outlets for increased production, and more office help is needed to process government reports and important business records. From these results it seems that the decrease in employees from plant closings and con— solidations was almost matched by a concomitant increase in employees among growing dairies. l4. Fifty-two plants Offered comments on the type or quality of training programs that dairy or food technology departments should provide: More training needed in: business, labor relations, management. . . . . 10 broad educational background . . . . . . . . . 5 food science, bacteriology, chemistry; any science Option . . . . . . . . . 5 dairy economics, accounting, cost control; relate actual dairy business to training . . l 15. 51 public speaking; lectures by industry peOple on practical dairy problems. . more practical eXperience; what to do when breakdowns occur; how to salvage products. . packaging, freezer Operation, novelty pro— duction, flavoring, overrun control. COOperative work-study program in the junior year. Short course recommendations: good short course fine for small plant would like a mix manufacturing course. longer training to benefit smaller firm. allow trainees to spend weekends at home add courses in laboratory testing, mix formulation, cultures, standardizing, and sanitation General comments were offered by 22 plants: We are a small dairy, questions don't apply to us; don't need or hire skilled technicians; can 't afford high wages demanded by college graduates. We need to attract students and capable people to train for managerial jobs; dairies must pay more to attract and keep students; fewer dairies will mean a greater need for technical personnel There is insufficient volume to Operate efficiently and less need for technical employees. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Labor is scarce; hard to fill any job. Labor union contract precludes the hiring of trained people and retards their promotion. Our problem is training and keeping driver- salesmen. . College graduates are nOt interested in plant work . . We haven‘t hired any college graduates; don‘t know what they have to offer We prefer men with no experience SO we can train them ourselves . . Michigan State University entrance require— ments are too high. They discourage some high school students from entering dairy technology HF‘P‘H 16 10 NO) 52 The primary needs of Michigan dairies are for eXpe- rienced supervisory personnel and skilled machine operators to meet present manpower scarcities. Plants are interested in programs that will either provide them with trained men, or with the means Of providing training for their employees. Their immediate need is for training in supervisory Skills, cost control, salesmanship, processing techniques, engineer- ing, and quality control. There is less need for Special— ized training in the sciences though the importance Of sci- ence in helping to better meet competition is not denied. Under these conditions, university dairy technology departments and dairy technology associations might best serve the training needs Of the industry by improving and expanding the methods and facilities for bringing training closer to the plant in a continuous and systematic fashion, by stimulating attendance at short courses and conferences, and by encouraging the development and use Of in—plant training programs. 53 Survey of Large National and Regional Dairy Corporations Of the 23 large companies surveyed, 18 returned their questionnaire, or 78.3 percent. In this survey most respon- dents answered all the questions. When not 18, the exact number Of companies answering a particular question is given in reporting results. 1. Of the 17 corporations responding to Question 1, nine firms (53.0%) stated there was a serious Shortage Of dairy technology graduates, seven (41.2%) indicated a moder— ate shortage, and one (5.8%) reported no Shortage. 2. On the question of the availability Of dairy tech- nologists, 11 companies (61.1%) did not find enough gradu- ates to fill their needs, five companies (27.8%) reportedly found enough, and two companies (11.1%) stated the availabil- ity of dairy technologists was either not a problem or Of no concern . 3. On the question of hiring dairy technologists, l7 corporations (94.4%) hired dairy technology graduates for Specific positions, while one corporation (5.6%) did not give dairy technologists preference for jobs. 54 4. Seventeen companies could hire a total of 143 dairy technologists per year if available. This is an average of job openings currently available per company per year. Actual numbers ranged from 1 to 20. Although 143 job Openings represents a substantial number of employment opportunities, the total number of grad- uates in dairy technology for the last 4 years would not satisfy the yearly needs of these 17 companies. Furthermore, these 143 openings are not the extent of job Opportunities for dairy technologists. 5. Seventeen companies reported a total Of 78,460 reg— ular employees in 1965. This includes one corporation which reported 4,500 employees in only one division Of the company. The 1960 United States Census (52) reported 74,669 Opera- tives, kindred workers and laborers in dairy products based on a 5 percent sample Of the population. The differences in the two figures may be due to the many workers in non-dairy divisions within these corporations, and to errors in census estimates. 6. Of the 17 companies answering the question concern- ing adequacy Of undergraduate training Of dairy technolo- gists, 10 (59.0%) were well satisfied with student training, but seven firms (41.0%) stated training was fair, with some 55 weakness in background knowledge. NO company criticized training as ”poor.” Officials who said training was "fair” pointed out areas of additional training that would remedy the deficiencies. 7. Sixteen corporations offered suggestions for addi- tional training of dairy technologists. Thirteen companies (52.0%) suggested more training in business, nine (36.0%) proposed more training in engineering, two (8.0%) suggested more chemistry, and one company (4.0%) suggested more micro— biology. Among the other recommendations were training in production and personnel management, English, public Speak— ing, letter writing, humanities, food technology, and on-the— job training during the summer. ReSpondents generally thought training was not bad but could be improved. Their suggestions for more emphasis on business and engineering may reflect the complexity Of mechanization and the greater efficiency Of Operation. The answers corroborate the results of Question 6 in the Michigan dairy survey. Respondents of large plants were mostly person- nel directors and were willing to suggest remedies for defi— ciencies in training. Several corporations stressed the importance of the ability to communicate. 56 8. The corporations listed, by percentages, their con— tacts with dairy technology graduates. Approximately 61.0 percent of the contacts were made through university dairy technology or food technology department Officials, 20.6 percent were by campus interviews, 7.8 percent came from var— ious employment agencies, 6.3 percent came from employees‘ suggestions, and 4.3 percent Of the contacts from other sources (correspondence and industry personnel). The results indicate that large dairies depend to a great extent on university contacts and campus interviews for dairy technologists. This refutes the statement by Drohan (24) that few dairies conducted interviews on campus and were not aggressive in campus recruiting. His comments were based on reports Of college placement directors, how- ever most contacts were not placed through this source but through dairy technology department personnel. 9A. The corporations reported their eXpected sources Of qualified manpower for a dairy technologist's job if none were available. Approximately 43.4 percent would hire an experienced man from outside the company, 30.2 percent Of the companies would train a present employee for the technol- ogist's job, 24.8 percent would hire a graduate in another field, and 1.5 percent would seek other sources (not men— tioned). 57 These answers are Similar to the results of Question 8 of the Michigan dairy survey, reflecting a logical desire by companies to Obtain eXperienced personnel at least possi- ble eXpense. Having enough technically trained personnel to fill future job vacancies is the result of deliberate, long range manpower planning to have adequately trained peOple available. The 24.8 percentthat hire graduates in fields other than dairy technology incur additional training costs. 9B. Seventeen companies reported their choices of col— lege graduates from other fields who could fill their needs when dairy technology graduates were not available. Four- teen corporations provided the actual ranking data presented in Table 7. Large dairies may hire food science graduates for their scientific training in foods, perhaps hoping to apply their skills to dairy foods. The second and third place ranking of business and engineering graduates supports a previous statement of the need for these peOple. The choices selected by the dairy technology departments (Ques— tion 9) do not agree closely with the industry choices. Department respondents viewed the dairy labor situation from theoretical aSpects, while personnel directors probably pre- sented a practical analysis of their manpower needs. 58 H N m e m Ream O N m N v H O N m N v .num e e O O O N N N m m m .npv m NH O NH O m H v m e N .Oum v ON O NH NH v H m N m m .OcN Om m O m OH m OH H O H N .pmH mocm mcH >wo >upmH mmo: OsHm> muse muH >mo supwH mmoc Emma -Hom numoc IHOHO IEOQU :Hmzm xcmm :HOm lumen uHOHn IEOEO :Hmsm Ooom uncm aOuOHZ Ooom :Hmcm IOHOHZ mmuoum Ompanmz mchcommmm onchsoo mo .02 mHanHm>m you who: mmemOHocnOOp >uHmO eons mOcHHQHOmHO Honpo mo moumnnmum How moouoummmum .n OHan 59 10. Seventeen corporations reported their eXpected sources of technically trained personnel for the next few years. The figures indicate frequency of mention: Increase college recruitment to hire more dairy technology graduates; keep in closer contact with dairy technology departments. . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Industry sources and contacts. . . . . . . . . 3 Use more food technologists. 2 Company training of men with management potential. . . . . . . . 2 Employment agencies, trade journal ads . . . . 1 Encourage young employees with potential to attend college outside their daily work . l Dairies could also investigate the possibilities of hiring immigrants with dairy eXperience. These people are usually well trained, and Skilled in butter and cheese making and cultured products. The rate of immigration Of people with these skills is not precisely known however. Foreign exchange students who are majoring in dairying in their home countries may provide good temporary help for dairies. While corporations still intend to recruit trained men from university dairy technology departments, the lack of students may force them to consider the other sources mentioned unless enrollment can be increased. 11. Eight corporations reported their estimated cost Of training programs for 1965. The total was $ 93,000. One cxnnpany reported a cost Of $ 2,000 per man, and nine compa- Iries said costs were ”not available.” These companies 60 either did not know their training costs, or were reluctant tO disclose them. Not enough reSpondentS answered tO give reliable results. 12. Suggestions for attracting more students into dairy technology programs were presented by 14 companies: Accelerate high school recruiting; talks by college and industry personnel at high school career days or dairy industry days. . 6 Work more closely with high school counselors . . . . . 2 Contact counselors Of cOllege freShmen 1 Better promotional material, slides, movies, bulletins. . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Provide more scholarships. . . . 2 Remove the "farm image” from the OccupatiOn; inform students of Opportunities in dairy- ing other than farming . . . . 2 Encourage educational programs with state dairy products association . . . . . . 1 Better utilization of dairy technOlOgy student‘s talents by the industry. . . . . . 1 l3. Fourteen companies also presented suggestions for additional training that would more closely suit their employment needs. Provide more business training . . , . . 3 Provide a good basic program in applied dairy courses, technical and scientific subjects, but allow flexibility for the broad development of a student . . . . 2 Emphasize English, Speech and writing skills . 2 Place less emphasis on production and processing; more on principles . . . . . 2 Must have a high calibre faculty; students will be better motivated in a dairy industries department than in a food science department . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 61 More liberal arts and humanities . . . . . 1 We need more graduate students who could be trained for top management jobs . . . . . 1 Consider setting up two-year programs. . . . . 1 Men are generally well trained but are not broad enough or familiar with handling peOple; they seem to have limited management potential . . . . . . . . 1 Too many dairy technology schools, not enough students. The departments are going downhill; many graduates are unwilling to relocate. . . . . . . . . . . . l Officials of dairy corporations agreed with the dairy technology department heads that emphasis should be placed on skillful, aggressive recruiting Of high school students, the creation of a favorable image for the indus- try, and more imaginative publicity. Officials of large dairies placed more emphasis on supervisory skills, probably with the intention of promoting university graduates to man— agerial positions. In small dairies the manager is closely connected with processing and must have skills in both pro— duction and business. In larger plants where managers are less involved in processing, production reSponsibilities are delegated to skilled employees while managers concentrate on their Specialized areas. The results of Questions 1 through 5 are similar to the results found in the first two surveys. Large dairy corporations employing a major portion of the total United States dairy workers are finding a Shortage Of university trained dairy technologists. Almost all corporations had Specific positions in mind for graduates, but were not able to find enough to fill their needs. RECOMMENDATIONS If educational programs of universities continue to fail to provide sufficient dairy technology graduates, var— ious alternative measures for obtaining technically trained personnel must be investigated. This section presents some approaches which might be considered. Factors Involved in Training Many factors influence the effectiveness of training and the use and application of various teaching methods and devices. Some of the factors which have an influence on instructing dairy workers are motivation, age and education of the trainee, and the attitude of management and unions toward training. Motivation is probably the most important ingredient necessary for successful training. Top management Officials, union leaders, and employees must be motivated to place training in its proper perspective. Motivation is Shown by sustained involvement in the learning process stimulated by training. Generally, three elements are necessary for a trainee to commit his energy to a learning process: he must want the training, he must feel the training is worth his 62 63 continued effort, and he must feel a sense of accomplishment. It is often the duty of the plant manager to provide the motivation and incentive for employees to take training programs. One Of the primary purposes of university extension education should be to make dairy plant managers, or those responsible for training dairy employees, aware of the ben— fits of a prOperly organized and conducted training program, and to assist in providing the materials and methods by which employees can best be trained. Training management first is a recognized technique to stimulate management in— volvement, and generate motivation for in-plant training. The supervisor should know what is being taught, he should believe that training is beneficial for an employee, and he should communicate that belief to the employee. Instructors and supervisors Should reinforce the trainee‘s sense Of accomplishment, and Opportunities should be given the trainee to make practical use Of what he has learned while training continues. The age of an employee influences his ability to be trained only insofar as his health and mental ability are affected. The ages of the trainees would make no apprecia- ble difference if they have kept 511 practice and are well guided during the training period. The extent of previous education seems to be a problem in training Older workers. 64 Many have little formal education, and have difficulty com- peting with younger, better educated workers for jobs requir- ing greater skill and knowledge. Thus, feelings of inade- quacy Often inhibit the Older worker from taking advantage of training programs. Union seniority provisions may restrict management in promoting younger workers who are more competent. Often the Older workers with the most seniority are least able to perform jobs requiring greater skills. There is little jus- tification for a union local to reject company training on the grounds that upgraded employees leave the union. Often the labor contract Specifies who is to be considered a union member. Generally unions have supported vocational training and employee retraining programs. Many unions are actively engaged in Operating their own trade schools and apprentice- ship programs. Union leaders could do much to provide the atmOSphere and encouragement for employees to take training courses, and should work with management in attracting capa— ble young peOple into the industry. 65 Practical Training Programs for Dairy Plants The process of upgrading employees should begin with basic instructions within the plant. AS training becomes accepted by employees, methods could be adOpted for bringing university short course training into the plant. The suc- cess of basic programs would serve as the foundation for introducing SOphisticated devices and techniques to rein- force and extend the basic instruction program. Training could begin with the selection of several foremen or supervisors who would attend lecture-discussion sessions several times a week with the plant manager. Study material would be taken from current dairy textbooks, and reading assignments could be made from literature reported by the university dairy technology departments, United States Departments Of Agriculture and Public Health Service, dairy trade associations, and in trade journals. Films and other visual aids are available from these sources. The university department of dairy technology could assist in selecting and organizing the material. The Dairy Industry Plant Training Manual is suggested as a guide to providing a logical sequence of material. The subjects covered Should he predetermined tw the manager, and the Objectives Of the program clearly set forth. Training should include: the composition Of milk, its characteristics under processing, and factors affecting 66 the flavor of dairy products. Dairy microbiology should emphasize quality control, factors influencing the growth and death of microorganisms, sources of contamination, and laboratory procedures. Practical dairy engineering could also be included. Throughout the program trainees could compare correct procedures with actual conditions within the plant. Suggestions for improvement should be encouraged. This program could be undertaken by a small plant at low costs. Such costs might include textbooks; rental Of projectors and films on milk nutrients, cheese making, bacte— rial growth, and other dairy industry topics; purchase Of other visual aids on production and consumption trends, equipment diagrams and product flow charts, chemical and mathematical tables, and reprints Of technical articles; and the wages of the manager and trainees during training time. The program can be eXpanded to other subjects with the use of mechanical training devices. Attendance at Michigan State University short courses in dairy products has become noticeably lower for the last few years. At the same time a large attendance occurred at a weekly series Of evening, off-campus dairy lectures. Evidently the need for short course type train- ing still exists, but with the current shortage Of skilled labor dairiescannot send their men to the university for training. 67 There are several alternative methods to bring train- ing to the plants or make training more readily available. Dairy technology associations could organize teaching teams Of several members to visit cooperating dairies in a certain area once a week to present lectures on basic dairy material. The university dairy technology departments could provide materials and suggestions for presenting the information. Since managers of the plants involved would most likely be members of the association, the program would be planned and directed by those directly interested in its success. COOp— erating dairies could share the costs Of the program and still train their men for less than it would cost them to do it alone. Another variation of this method would be to have the associations hold weekly evening classes to which dairies could send their trainees. If dairy technology associations are unwilling or unable to conduct such programs, several dairies in one city or area could COOperate in arranging a series of weekly dairy workshops. Instructors from the dairy technology department, or other industry personnel could present the training material. The lectures may be devoted to one tOpic or several; certain employees could be required to attend lectures in their field. This type of arrangement is best suited (but not limited) to dairies in a large city to facil- itate coordination among plants, and to provide a location 68 convenient to the trainees. Good attendance should be assured to justify the time and expense of the instructor. Should these programs become tOO wideSpread and time consum— ing for university instructors, dairies should plan and direct the programs with general assistance from the univer- sity. Dairy technology departments Should encourage efforts to provide training programs that originate within the industry. Use and Application of Mechanical TrainingyDevices The selection Of any instructional tool must be made after considerable thought has been given to the Objectives of the training programs, the extent and difficulty of the material to be presented, the peOple to receive training, the educational level of trainees, time allowed for training, and the funds available. Assuming such Objectives have been determined, management then examines alternative devices for presenting the required material, and selects the best method or combination Of devices consistent with the Objectives. This discussion gives a general indication of the costs and possible applications of training devices. Men— tion of Specific corporations and products does not consti- tute an endorsement, but is used merely as an example. 69 Projectors Several 8 mm. rear screen projectors, ranging from $ 90 to $ 600 each, could be purchased for individual view- ing of films to reinforce other training materials, or to present information difficult to eXplain verbally. Differ- ent models in this price range accommodate still or motion pictures, with or without sound, running from 4 to 22 min- utes. American Airlines used the Fairchild Cinephonic Mark IV film cartridge projector ($ 565) with good results. A dairy plant might use these projectors to aid trainees in learning equipment Operation. The unit could be mounted near the work, and the employee could follow instruc- tions as he performs the task. The unit is simple to Oper- ate, no instructor is needed, material can be repeated, and new films can be purchased or made. One company made their own 8 mm. films for $ 2,000 each including artwork, writing, salaries, material, processing, and overhead costs. Training packages can be made up, using compact slide or filmstrip projectors (costs range from $ 60 to $ 200 each) along with programmed instruction materials, and shipped to groups for training. 7O Self-Instruction Carrels Using tape recorders and 8 mm. cartridge projectors, a dairy could construct several soundproof carrels for trainees to use at their convenience. These two devices could easily improve and extend the basic instructional pro- gram providing an efficient self—instructional program. Similar facilities offered at Purdue University in 1964 for botany classes were very successful. Lectures in dairy technology could be recorded by university instructors and mailed to the dairies. The tape recorder in each booth would allow the trainee to hear the lecture, take notes, complete workbook material on the lec- ture, and re-play portions not understood. Projectors in each booth present material on processes or concepts diffi- cult tO understand. If eXperiments are to be performed, the lecture tape could instruct the trainee to go to a labora- tory or work table where materials necessary for the eXperi- ment would be located. Filmstrips, or an instructor could present directions for the laboratory exercises. After the eXperiments and lecture have been completed, the trainee could be given a short quiz on the entire lesson. Tape recorders and headphones range in cost from $ 100 to $ 400. Construction and wiring Of the carrels xnight be about $ 150 each. Technicolor Corporation manufac— tures a good 8 mm. projector for $ 90. Single concept films 71 cost from $ 3 tO $ 15 each. Additional tapes, workbooks, Office supplies, mailing costs, etc. might add another $ 100 to $ 200. Costs would roughly be $ 500 to $ 1,000 per carrel exclusive of laboratory equipment, but these costs might be increased if workbooks and films had to be Specially prepared. The carrels could always be improved by the addition of some of the training devices below. Programmed Instructional Material In programmed instruction, subject matter is reduced to small learning steps selected and sequenced to build on preceding units. Almost any subject may be organized in programmed form, but the cost of doing this varies with the type, extent, and complexity of the material; who will use the program; and writing, printing, and validating the pro— gram. The author knows of no current P.I. textbooks in the dairy industry. The Resources Development Corporation of East Lansing, Michigan quoted the following costs for developing a programmed lesson: $ 2,250 for the first hour Of training material 2,250 for the second hour of training material 1,750 for the third hour of training material and each succeeding hour. These costs include determining the behavioral objectives, working with the subject matter Specialist, and writing and validating the program. Printing and artwork costs 20! per 72 COpy on minimum orders of 5,000 COpies, or $ 1,000. Because initial costs are high, several dairies could contribute to a university grant for the develOpment of programmed dairy technology material, or arrange a program through a profes- sional consulting firm. Programmed lessons have these advantages: they may be used anytime, anywhere; unfamiliar material is organized for easier learning; older workers may be taught easily; no mechanical devices are needed; the trainee learns at his own rate; they supplement other forms Of training; and costs for ready-made programs are low. Programmed textbooks in elec- tronics, economics, statistics, letter writing, etc., are available for $ 1.25 to $ 18.00. Lists of programs can be Obtained from commercial programming firms advertising in industry training journals or audio-visual equipment cata- logs. University colleges of education can also provide this information. The book, Programmed Learning, A Bibli- ography Of Programs and Presentation Devices, by Carl Hendershot, is the most accurate and current list of pro— grammed instruction material. Teaching Machines These devices use programmed material on paper strips or 35 mm. film to present the learning steps or frames. Machines range from simple, manually Operated paper tapes for $ 5, to elaborate electric machines for $ 5,000 73 that record the trainee's answers. A popular paper tape device is made by Koncept-O—Graph Corporation for $ 39. An electric model widely used in industrial training is U. S. Industries' Auto-Tutor Mark II at $ 1,250. The manufacturer claims the Auto-Tutor can be operated for 15¢ per hour. In electric machines movement of the film is determined by the answers selected by the trainee. If a trainee gives a wrong answer, branching responses present an eXplanation showing why the answer was wrong, and then returns to the original question. The advantages are similar to programmed textbooks: programmed films may be used repeatedly; training proceeds at the trainee's own rate; nO instructor is needed; they do not require elaborate Space or facilities; larger machines can keep a continuous record Of a trainee‘s progress; and one machine can be used to teach many subjects. The costs of producing a Special film are high, exceeding those given for paper programs because of photography equipment, filming, artwork, editing, and processing. Audio—visual materials instructors at Michigan State University use the rule-Of- thumb cost of $ 1,000 per minute of film. Once programmed, films can be purchased for $ 35 to $ 100 each. 74 Tele-Lecture Bell Telephone Systems has develOped two-way ampli— fied communications for small and large scale group partic- ipation in lectures and discussion. Regular telephone lines are used with additional equipment to amplify the Speaker's voice. Various pieces of amplifying equipment can be rented for audiences from 3 to 300 peOple. Costs vary with the size and number of audiences, distance of call, length of the lecture, period of week and time of day (to determine the cost of the call itself), and size of the town receiving the call. There is one rate for intrastate calls with varying day and night rates for inter- state calls. The telephone company will provide exact costs upon request. As an example, assume a university professor is to deliver a 1-hour lecture in dairy bacteriology to four audiences of 100 peOple each; to students in East Lansing, and simultaneouslyto dairy training groups in Ann Arbor, Jackson, and Detroit, Michigan. To lecture to these groups individually he may Spend 6 hours traveling 183 miles in 3 days, neglect his university work, incur travel eXpenses, and collect 10 hours in salary. To lecture the same four groups via tele-lecture the costs would be: 75 Rental Of three amplifiers at $ 60 each $ 180.00 Wiring of three rooms to receive call 44.00 Cost of call at $ 2.40 for the first three minutes,(148 for each additional minute 29.76 Total $ 253.76 Thus, 400 or more peOple could hear the same lecture simulta- neously for about 63% each. The conference sets described (renting for $ 60 for each 4 hours of use) accommodate audi— ences of 300 people. Approximately 1,200 peOple could hear the lecture at a cost Of 21% each. There are many advantages in the tele-lecture. Several audiences share the Speaker simultaneously; and time and travel inconvenience, scheduling problems, and related costs are greatly reduced. In addition, several authorities in a particular subject can contribute to the lecture from a local office. The program costs may be shared, and there is no equipment to buy. This device is best applied to infrequent lectures not requiring pictures or written material, but this can be overcome by using slides or films at the audience's location. High costs make it disadvantageous for daily use unless the telephone lines are leased. 76 Tele—Writer The telephone companies also provide lines for commu— nication of written messages using the Victor Comptometer Corporation‘s Victor Electrowriter Remote Blackboard (VERB). This system consists Of a transmitter ($ 675) and a receiv- ing device ($ 910) in both the instructor's classroom and the audience location. AS the instructor writes on the transmitter pad, the receiving pen etches his words onto an acetate strip. An overhead projector ($ 595) projects the words onto a screen in both locations. The oral presenta— tion is transmitted by micrOphoneS and Speakers on a separate line, or through another telephone. A combination transmit- ter-receiver with no overhead projector is available for $ 1,500. The equipment is generally purchased rather than rented. The telephone company rents a data set that trans— forms writing motion into electrical impulses for $ 11 per month; $ 10 to install. Lines may be leased on a 24-hour basis for $ 4.25 per mile, per month. Two lines are needed for written and oral communication. One could place a sta- tion-tO-station call as the oral portion Of the lecture, but dialing each call causes excessive interference and jumbled communications . The tele-writer is adaptable to any course which 115es a blackboard extensively, as chemistry or mathematics. 77 It is less useful for lectures requiring pictures or visual aids, but again this can be overcome by using films and slides at the audience‘s location. Groups of 50 persons can easily be accommodated by one receiver, depending on the pro— jection equipment. One organization has used 20 receivers Operating from one transmitter, and while feedback from many receivers has been difficult, this is being corrected. Dairy technology departments, trade associations, or several dairies could purchase the VERB units and lease lines to provide dairy lectures throughout the state. Entire Short courses, undergraduate dairy courses, or grad- uate level courses in dairy chemistry, etc. might be trans— mitted. It is best applied to daily lectures or similar extensive use. Units could be shared among several plants. With daily lectures available right in the plant, trainees receive the benefit of college lectures on the job, training is closely scheduled, travel time to night classes is elimi- nated, and daily instruction is preferrable tO long, once-a- week lectures. Closed Circuit Television Televised lectures find wide application in univer— sity teaching, and may be applied to teaching dairy trainees. A New York school system adOpted closed circuit microwave television for broadcasting Special classes among its schools. They reported that costs range from $ 500,000 to 78 . several million depending upon the size and sophistication of the installation. The equipment was manufactured by Micro-Link Systems, New York, and includes: One low-power transmitter for each channel; 10 to 15 mile range $ 15,000 Studio costs $ 25,000 to $ 500,000 Antenna; each $ 1,000 Receiving monitors; each $ 150 Television cameras range in cost from $ 600 to $ 4,000; mon— itors from $ 150 to $ 600. Diamond Electronics Corporation produces a CCTV sys— tem for about $ 11,000 which includes three cameras, two monitors, and all controls. Ampex Corporation manufactures a video-tape recorder and playback system, including a cam- era, for $ 6,000. Video-tapes can be replayed Often, or erased for other material. Television finds Optimum use in pointing out correct and incorrect procedures in actual operations, aids in presenting a sequence of events or Opera— tions, and is useful in filming Operations which must be duplicated elsewhere, as an overseas plant. Smaller units are for in-plant use, where demonstrations can be photo- graphed close up and monitored in the classroom. Currently, high costs dictate that equipment receive extensive use in several areas besides training. For this reason, CCTV is more appropriate for large dairy corporations 'with extensive training needs among many groups in one city or one plant. Costs reported are Often minimum and equipment 79 purchased for these amounts produce mediocre results. For an effective, working system, actual costs may be almost double the original estimate due to wiring requirements, con- struction of Special facilities, training operators, rehears- ing, directing, etc. Computer Assisted Training Corporations and universities have installed com- puter directed teaching machines, and have reported success— ful results. Computer systems have great possibilities for instructing many trainees from a single source. In the dialed access computer system, a trainee in a Special carrel dials into a central switchboard to select lectures he wishes to hear. Computers activate a playback mechanism to play the tape selected. The company or univer- sity provides the playback mechanism, while the telephone company leases the bridging devices and lines. International Business Machines has an in-company training program using a 1440 computer in New York, with 1050 communicating typewriters located at IBM centers across the nation. These receiving stations are supported by visual devices (similar to teaching machines) under computer control. .Extensive instruction in electrical circuits is thus provided to sales representatives and machine servicemen. Monroe International Corporation manufactures a small computer unit for use in a classroom (Monrobot XI) for 80 $ 22,050. This unit essentially stores and plays back infor- mation in a few subjects such as mathematics, science, and business. Undoubtedly computer assisted training could be used for instructing dairy employees. Several dairies could in— stall carrels in the plant, and trainees could dial lectures in dairy technology from a cooperatively owned playback machine. Other advantages Of computer directed training machines are: a computer provides instant feedback on errors or correct answers, there is no practical limit to the amount of information the computer can provide, continual revision of material is simplified, the system can record the progress of the trainee, and adjust the pace and difficulty Of train- ing. In addition, managerial trainees could use the comput— er's extensive store Of information to simulate business Operations and predict the effects Of alternative business decisions. The playback device, preparation of lecture tapes, and computer selector are major cost items in the dialed access system. While no published costs were found for this system or the IBM system, such installations could easily cost several million dollars. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION BachelorS degrees in dairy technology have continued to decrease from 1962 to 1965 while the numbers of food technology degrees have increased. Only 517 bachelorS degrees were granted by 38 universities during this four year period. In 1965 the average was 2.9 graduates per university. Dairy technology departments reported an average of five job Openings per bachelorE degree graduate in 1964. Both the Michigan dairies and large dairy companies reported high demands for dairy technology graduates. Dairy technology departments predicted enrollments would remain the same or increase slightly from 1966 to 1970. There is a trend to consolidation of dairy technology into food technology curricula. Other changes included more courses in business and engineering, thus meeting a need expressed by companies in the survey. 81 82 Accelerated recruiting of qualified high school students in urban areas, increased publicity, the creation Of a favorable industry image, and increased starting salaries were four major suggestions to increase enrollment in dairy technology. Most of the Michigan dairies replying would train present employees for skilled jobs in the plant. Small dairies rarely or occasionally Offered training programs, while large dairies Offered training on a more continuous basis. Several possibilities might be considered for training dairy plant employees: a. improvement of lecture—discussion presentations of basic dairy principles either by the individ- ual plant or by several dairies with university assistance; b. the use Of self—instructional devices as training carrels, programmed instruction material, and teach- ing machines (the development of programmed dairy material might be worth the investment in prelimi- nary work); c. devices for long distance transmission of training material as tele-lecture, tele-writer, closed 83 circuit television, and computer assisted teaching machines. In conclusion, dangerously low numbers Of dairy tech— nology students are graduating to fill the needs of the industry; therefore, action is needed tO provide the trained personnel necessary if dairies are to eXpand and survive in the competitive economy. 10. ll. 12. 13. LITERATURE CITED Anastos, C. (1962). Automation and mechanization. Milk Dealer 51: (4) 32. (1962). A crisis in dairy school enrollment. Milk Dealer 51: (12) 34—37. (1965). Survival of the biggest. Milk Dealer 54: (12) 50,77. Anonymous. (1965). Borden's opens nation's largest dairy plant. Pure Pak News 4: 16—18. Anonymous. (1965). Employment - almost full. Time 86: (20) 103. Anonymous. (1963). Employment projections to 1975. Monthly Labor Review 86: (3) 240-248. Anonymous. (1963). Interim revised projections Of the U.S. labor force. Occupational Outlook Quart. 7: (2) 30. Anonymous. (1963). Recent trends and impact Of unemployment. Monthly Labor Review 86: (3) 249—254. Anonymous. (1965). School for all through the age Of 20. Time 85: (10) 60—65. Anonymous. (1965). Tested technique for training. DuPont Magazine 59: (5) 1. Anonymous. (1965). The cybernated generation. Time 85: (14) 84-91. Anonymous. (1965). The head of the class. Time 86: (16) 60-68. Anonymous. (1964). The trend‘s to Specialization. Milk Dealer 53: (10) M2-M3. 84 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24w 25% 85 Auman, Fred A. (1962). Retraining - how much of an answer to technological unemployment? Personnel Jour. 41: (10) 505—507. Bennett, K. W. (1962). Untapped sources of managerial talent. Personnel 39: (4) 51—61. Bradfield, Alec. (1963).' Training dairy personnel in Europe. Amer. Milk Review 25: (4) 26. Cassidy, Robert E. (1963). Manpower planning: a coordinated approach. Personnel 40: (5) 35-41. Cherne, Leo. (1965). Management facing dearth, not death knell. Personnel 42: (4) 50. Chernick, J. and Hill, J. D. (1965). Manpower problems in a dynamic labor market: a compilation of management views. Report NO. 1, Institute of Management and Labor Relations, Rutgers Univ. 27 pp. Clague, Ewan. (1961). Social and economic aspects of automation. Monthly Labor Review 84: (9) 957—960. Cohen, Sanford. (1960). Labor in the United States. C. E. Merril Books, Inc., Columbus, Ohio. 666 pp. Coulter, Samuel T. (1965). Recruiting students for dairy science. Paper 3, pp. 25-27, in F. V. Kosikowski and A. W. Marsden, eds. Contemporary Views on World Dairy Science Education. Dept. of Food Sci., Cornell Univ., Ithaca. 134 pp. Crossley, E. L. (1965). University graduate programmes in dairy science. Paper 17, pp. 119-125, in F. V. Kosikowski and A. W. Marsden, eds. Contemporary Views on World Dairy Science Education. Dept. of Food Sci., Cornell Univ., Ithaca. 134 pp. Drohan, T. E. (1965). Romance and the dairy industry. Milk Dealer 54: (11) 70-77. Gardner, Karl E. (1965). The need for university trained personnel in the dairy industry. Dept. Of Agr. Econ. Bull. NO. 10., Univ. of 111., Urbana., pp. 39-44. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 86 Geyer, Richard E. (1965). Trends and issues in under- graduate education in the agricultural sciences. Paper presented at the Meeting Of Deans and Directors Of Resident Instruction, Colleges of Agriculture. New Orleans, Louisiana, April 9. (Unpublished.) Gould, I. A. (1963). Problems Of keeping dairy plants supplied with the foreman type employee. Jour. Dairy Sci. 46: (1) 72-76. Greenberg, Leon and Weinberg, Edgar. (1964). Techno— logical change, productivity, and employment. Occupational Outlook Quart. 8: (3) 5—11. Gregory, Max E. (1960). Role Of Short courses, conferences, and newsletters in personnel training. Jour. Dairy Sci. 43: (12) 1877-1879. Guerra, Donald E. (1963). An efficient plant replaces seven. Amer. Milk Review 25: (4) 32. Hall, Carl W. (1962). Automation for the dairy plant. Paper 2, pp. 8—16, in Proc. Tenth Annl. Natl. Dairy Engineering Conf. Mich. State Univ., East Lansing. 128 pp. Hartman, Richard I. (1965). Managerial manpower planning: a key tO survival. Personnel Jour. 44: (2) 86-91. Herrington, B. L. (1962). Changes in dairy manufactur- ing education. Jour. Dairy Sci. 45: (1) 119-122. Huddleston, Edith M. (1964). Opening college enroll- ment. Higher Education 20: (6) 9. Johnston, Denis F. (1963). Uptrend in worker education. Occupational Outlook Quart. 7: (3) 14-18. Josephson, D. V. (1964). Some Observations on graduate education in dairy science. Paper presented at the F.A.O. International Meeting on Dairy Education. Paris, France, June 2-8, 1964. (Unpublished.) Juers, L. E. and McMillan, Anita. (1965). Michigan dairy plants - changes in size, numbers and products produced, 1950 and 1963. Dept. Of Agr. Econ., Report No. 4, Mich. State Univ., East Lansing. 18 pp. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 87 Kelly, Philip L. (1965). Total dairy enrollment (graduate and undergraduate) by years in both dairy production and products; and other mimeographed tables. Unpublished data, Univ. of Nebraska, Lincoln. Kiermeier, F. (1965). Undergraduate dairy education in colleges and advanced technical institutes. Paper 16, pp. 114-118, in F. V. Kosikowski and A. W. Marsden, eds. Contemporagy Views on World Dairy Science Education. Dept. of Food Sci., Cornell Univ., Ithaca. 134 pp. Kosikowski, Frank V. (1965). The patterns of world dairy science education. Paper 1, pp. 2—17, in F. V. Kosikowski and A. W. Marsden, eds. Contemporagy Views on World Dairy Science Education. Dept. Of Food Sci., Cornell Univ., Ithaca. 134 pp. Kruger, Daniel H. (1964). Automation: implications. Paper 17, pp. 73-75, in Proc. Twelfth Annl. Natl. Dairy Engineering Conf. Mich. State Univ., East Lansing. 93 pp. Mann, J. D. (1965). Providing for present and future management needs. Personnel 42: (4) 26-32. Mott, Frank L. (1962). Manpower and immigration. Manpower Report NO. 4, U.S. Dept. of Labor, November 20. 4 pp. Nielsen, V. H. (1963). The dairy industry and higher education. Food Technol. 17: (12) 1526-1528. Rippen, A. L., Juers, L. E., and Murray, D. L. (1965). A look at Michigan's rural potential in 1980 - dairy. Phase III, mimeographed committee report. Unpub- lished data, Mich. State Univ., East Lansing. Smith, J. Edwards. (1965). The management depletion dilemma. Speech delivered to the Joint General Session, Milk Industry Foundation and International Association Of Ice Cream Manufacturers. Montreal, Canada, October 18. (Unpublished.) Solberg, Peter. (1965). Recruitment problems and career opportunities. Paper 2, pp. 19—24, in F. V. Kosikowski and A. W. Marsden, eds. Contemporary Views on World Dairy Science Education. Dept. Of Food Sci., Cornell Univ., Ithaca. 134 pp. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 88 Taylor, Cora E. (1963). The occupational outlook for 1970. Occupational Outlook Quart. 7: (1) 7-13. Thom, Edward. (1961). Automation - now. Paper 8, pp. 33-36, in Proc. Ninth Annl. Natl. Daigy Engineering Conf. Mich. State Univ., East Lansing. 93 pp. (1965). Bring back the short course. Milk Dealer 54: (6) M3. Tracy, Paul H. (1962). Ten predictions. Milk Dealer 51: (10) 56, 110. U.S. Bureau of the Census (1960). United States census Of pOpulation: 1960. Subject reports, Occupational characteristics. Final report PC (2)-7A. U.S. Govt. Printing Off., Washington. 530 pp. U.S. Dept. of Labor. (1963). Educational trends. Pp. 30-31. Occupational Outlook Handbook 1963-1964 ed., Bull. NO. 1375. 792 pp. Williams, John D. (1965). Dealing with junior executive turnover. Management Review 54: (3) 49-51. Wishart, Paul B. (1965). Wanted — 200,000 top business managers. Management Review 54: (3) 4-14. Worrilow, G. M. (1962). Surmounting local, state, interstate and regional problems in updating, revising, reorganizing, consolidating dairy science departments. Jour. Dairy Sci. 45: (9) 1131-1137. 'APPENDIX 90 31.8.0. Dairy Plant Department of Food Science Michigan State University Beet Leneing, Michigan 48823 June 14, 1965 Dear We are in need of acne intonation which ehould be of intereet to all of ue in dairying and thue are aeking a few minutes of your time. Here ie the etory in brief: A noticeable ehortage of dairy manufacturing graduatee exiet in Michigan. We wonder how critical the ehortage may be in your etate. Our interaet aleo ie in the projected need for technically trained pareonnel for the dairy induetry. would you pleaee take a few ninutee to anewer the queetione on the encloead eheet. Pareonal euggaetione are encouraged, and your reeponeae will be valuable. Individual data will be handled confidentially. A emery will be eant to you. if requested. We would appreciate your reply within the next few daye. Sincerely youre , 8. E. Roeei Dairy Induetrial rellow Ge )1. Trout Profeeeor, Food Science Encloeure 1 Fig. 1. Enclosure letter for dairy technology department survey. 9 1 QUESTICNNAIRE Trends ig_enrollment and graduation in dairy manufacturing_schoole University 0 Please check or write your answer in the space provided. Use the back or an extra sheet if necessary. Your comments are specifically invited. l. 2. 3. 4. S. 6. Fig. now many undergraduates were enrolled in dairy manufacturing progress during the 1964-1965 school year? How many graduate students were enrolled in a Master's program in dairy manufacturing during the 1964-1965 school year? Bowwmany in a Ph. D. program in the 1964-1965 school year? About what number of bachelor's degrees were granted? 9121 Manufacturing (if. fi%¥ged) 1965 (estimate) (estimate) 1964 1963 1962 In your opinion, what will be the trend in enrollments in your under- graduate dairy manufacturing progrmm the next 5 years? Same ; lees ; Home . A. Give the average number of job offers per Bachelor of Science graduate in 1964. B. About how many job offers did each graduate student who obtained a degree receive? How serious is the shortage of A-year dairy ‘manufacturing graduates :hnyourlnmte? 2. Questionnaire sent to university dairy technology departments. ~00 ' l . u ‘ "a 'e 1‘ . a . .- ~~' ‘ ' . "' r. v . e e .-- e .. u 1.} . -"' r. 7. 9. 10. ll. 92 -2 D If basic curriculum changes were made in the dairy manufacturers pro- gram during the last two years, give the nature of these changes and the reasons. Is the dairy products graduate competitive ealarywiee with graduates of other departments in job seeking (positions in dairy plants)? Can B. S. graduates from other departments fulfill the dairy industry needs? If "yes", which of the following areas would be preferred (in- dicate by l, 2, 3, etc.)? Business Engineering Chemistry Microbiology Other What recomendatione do you have for alleviating the shortage of graduates for the dairy industry? If you wish a emery of this survey, kindly sign your name. Please return to: Mr. Samuel E. Rossi M.S.U. Dairy Plant Michigan State University East Lana ing, Michigan 48823 . . .' . I . . . l" e V... e. ' . I ' a 0 . ' I . ' s - ' . *. . . 9 , _r . .. . ' l ‘ . n . - .e' ..‘ an. -. ,. >~‘ . . . . o... . . -. - — .. ng- agV-— .. .c. - ~ ~. . . _ .. fl . o .. - .7 . .-...- e ..--. .s'me. -e.ur . - _- , a -. e— -v- .. --- ~-.. - s. e s.. , .p- , U. .- e. 14. o t‘ evil ' , n n ' e ‘l- I ' ‘ I e e' l C‘ D .e --~.---...~.- .--u .m- - ,. - i s . a.“ , . ~ D ' .A ' ... . - . . v . .\.. n . . . , u - . v . . . - f5 . . . e' -«'-'.’.'.. .'.- I ...' I, . “‘0 n. n . — a . . 7‘ ~- H... . - .. ..- 4‘" - e . . , -- H- . .- ~e- - .- u - . . .. o - .. ... .. ‘. . - . e p.-- - . . . Ce.‘ - v‘ .‘ ' ,u g. I '. ' e ' ., e a. _ e k ‘ ‘ s ' o, _ s e v ' j l ' . . ' . 'l .‘ .' . I n I . I. ‘ O C l I In .4 s - '2: -‘4 ' o u. - II. "l -” ' a. ' ‘ z a! - .- _ no 0‘ . ' 1.. s. " e 'l. s -‘- l u ' e ’3 , . a a . .e . . .. ... - , e ‘ 0' I, ,0 _ ._ , I I I V. l . '. ‘ .‘ . . .G'. A -o- ,. l t g. h ' v , v a fi . to U. - '* fi‘. ‘ . . ._ .. . - - . .. . - . .. . .. . .. r g . .- , . .. ... .. . .. . ... .. . . . . . .. q. . ..._.- . . - . a _ - : -» -.- - . . . . . . . , . .. s . . . , . . u , , . . .. . . . _. - s 93 MICHIGAN STNTB UNIVERSITY 0 East Lansing Department of Food Science . Dairy Plant October 14, 1965 In view of the apparent trend, we are concerned about the shortage of technically trained men available to you specifically and to the dairy industry in general. The seriousness of this problem should be eval- uated, and if it's becoming worse, corrective measures should be initiated without delay. Dairy educators and industry representatives need to cooperate on the problem since the future of Michigan's dairy industry depends on a sufficient supply of trained men. This survey is a portion of a general study to identify the problems, to investigate solutions,‘make recommendations, and stimulate preventive actions in order to guard the future of the‘Michigen dairy industry. Your answers and opinions on the attached sheet will be very helpful. In fact, a few‘minutee now may benefit your company in the future. Individual plant data will be handled confidentially with summaries available upon request. Your reply is urgent. ‘Msy we have it today? Sincerely, Samuel B. Rossi Dairy Technologist T. I. Medrick Professor of Food Science Enclosures: Questionnaire Reply envelope Fig. 3. Enclosure letter for Michigan dairy plant survey. 3. S. 6. 7. 94 DAIRY EMPLORHENT NEEDS (For each question check the answer which most nearly applies.) In general, there is a very serious , moderate , or no shortage of college trained dairy personnel available for the U.S. dairy industry. Do you have difficulty finding adequately trained.men for available jobs in your plant t? Yes No Don' t know When considering skilled employment in your plant, college men trained in dairy technology are: a. aired for certain positions, if available (if checked answer No. a). b. Given no preference for the skilled jobs. c. Never hired. If you checked 3a, list position titles usually filled or preferred to be filled with a college dairy technology graduate. a. d. b. e. c. f. would you hire more college dairy graduates if they were available (assuming a need for them in your plant)? Yes No In your opinion, is the present training of dairy technology students adequate for dealing with future problems that‘may arise? a. ____;1raining is satisfactory. b. _____Should have more training in science (chemistry, microbiology). c. _____Should have more training in engineering. d. _____Should have more training in business. e. Don't know. Please indicate if the following jobs are or were open in your plant. Answer 'yes' if job was filled within the last 12 months gg'if you think the job will be vacant soon. I ATPosition openTJ‘ I rDon't have this 9 Yes “0 type of jeb Supervisory: i Plant superintendent Foreman f Trained technician: Besearch.& development Lab quality control Fig. 4. Questionnaire sent to Michigan dairies. 9. 10. 95 -2- on'tfihsve this Y" No type of Qob Skilled operator for: Ice cream Pluid milk 1 “"’ Cheese & cultured products Butter r ' Dry milk ; (fill in others) Office & Sales: Bookkeeper e accountant Shipping 6 Purchasing Agent Salesmen Engineer: Electrician Refrigeration man Maintenance men Systems engineer 3 (fill {EHothersS h. For the skilled jobs in your plant, rank in order of importance your source of men to fill these jobs. a. Generally promote and train a present employee? ‘Iee No b. If you seek a man outside the company, which sources are used (rank let, 2nd, 3rd): Recruit from university dairy departments. Recruit from other companies. Other: (list) How frequently do you offer or make available training programs to your employees? a. Continuously. b. Occasionally. c. Rarely. Please give a brief description of your training program including purpose, material taught, jobs affected. 96 -3- 11. Are skilled employees and supervisors encouraged to attend short courses and conferences offered by various agencies: Yes . Mo suparviflor.eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeseeease Skill-Gd ”10"... O O O 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O. ' Doescompanypayexpenses................'. In general, do the same or different employees attend. 12. Average number of full-time employees is . 13. During the last 5 years, the number of employees in your plant has increased , decreased , or remained about the same . 14. What suggestions do you have for the university dairy or food science depart- ments in regards to type or quality of training that will better serve your employment needs? 15. Other consents: Please send to: Mr. Samuel B. Rossi M.S.O. Dairy Plant Michigan State University Bast Lansing, Michigan 48823 97 MECHIGAN STAIE UNIVERSITY ' East Lansing Department of Food Science ' Dairy Plant November 1, 1965 'Major dairy departments of universities have been unable to satisfy the requests of dairy corporations for trained dairy technologists. They just do not have enough graduates to fill important jobs in the.dairy industry. Dairy educators and industry representatives are considering this apparent shortage and are concerned about the trend. This study is highly desirable to determine if corrective measures are needed and which course of action to take. Recent cooperation from the dairy departments has been encouraging. Your answers and opinions on the attached sheet will be very helpful in gauging the activity of the larger corporations in the area of college employment. ‘The corporation's total demand for college men trained in dairy foods is a vital question and should be accurately determined. A fewflminutes nowwmay be beneficial to you or your company in the future. Individual plant data will be handled confidentially with summaries available upon request. Your reply is very important. May we have it today? Sincerely, \ . g. PW Samuel B. Rossi Dairy’Technologist SIR/me Enclosure: Questionnaire Fig. 5. Enclosure letter for large national and regional dairy corporation survey. 98 SURVEY OF DAIRY COMPANY EMPLOYMENT 1) (Please check the answer that most nearly applies) 1. In general, there is a very serious , moderate , or no shortage of college dairy technology graduates. 2. Within the last five years, have you found enough dairy trained graduates to fill your company needs? a. Yeas b. “00 c. Not a problem. 3. When considering employment in your company, college men trained in dairy technology are: a. Hired for certain positions. b. Given no preference for jobs. c. Never hired. 4. Approximately how many dairy trained graduates could you employ yearly for all plants and purposes assuming there were enough available? . S. The approximate number of people employed in your company is . 6. Have you generally been satisfied with the training of dairy technology graduates? a. ____JWell satisfied with training and background knowledge. b. ____;Training has been fair; some weaknesses in background knowledge. c. _____Poor training; inadequate background knowledge. d.0flmr: . 7. In what areas would you suggest additional training for dairy technology students to meet your future needs? a. None. e. Microbiology. b. Business. f. Other: c. Chemistry. d. Engineering. 8. Approximately what percent of your contacts with graduating dairy technologists come from each of the following sources? a. %.Direct contact with university dairy or food departments. b. 1 Interview of students through campus placement bureaus. c. 1 Suggestions from employees. Fig. 6. Questionnaire sent to large national and regional dairy corp. d. 1 Private and public employment agencies, etc. e. Other: 1 9. If a dairy technology graduate is needed, but not available for a particular job, what percent of these jobs would be filled by: (A) a. 1 Training a current employee. b. %.Hiring an experienced.men.from outside the company. c. I Hiring a graduate from another field and training him in dairy foods. d. Other: 1 (B) Which other college graduates would best fill your needs when dairy technology graduates are not available? Please rank from 1 through 5 in order of desirability. a. Business majors. d. Engineers. b. Chemists. e. Food Scientists. c. Microbiologis ts f. Other: 10. In the next few years, how do you expect to fill company needs for technically trained dairy personnel? __A A__.._._._.. 11. A rough estimate of current cost of your company's formal training programs is 8 . 12. What suggestions would you make for attracting more students into college dairy technology programs? ..... cup-0....“ fl.--v—- . . 4 . s . n . . . p._‘ ,.v .5 ' . .. .. .1 .-. .. ,.-‘ ' ,:.. . ~ . 'l u . s” "‘ . ' -'|| . . - In... l 0"- . a .0 . 'a 9 ) f . -"-. | a ‘s . . .u.’< - .o.._.-. xbasmsfi .r. u . ' ‘. I s _ .’ .3 " . g' ' ' ' .. —- . . . . ~ ,,' , , I s ‘- a . 3 ‘, ' - -. — . , . l . . . a , '.)'-.. - 1’ "I, . . ‘ ‘ ‘ a I ' . . , ”.1 .- ... .' . .n. . A . . , _ ' -_'-| - . . l I I ' \ - . . e . , ' ’ .‘I " .' I " d ’I c . N‘- w... . ' ~ -’ ) ~‘ - q- n . . ‘ l '.. I . 1‘ { I _ l . . .. . . I '. e .‘l . \ ‘ J “of? . r. “ - I ‘ " """' a guns .4 . an“-.. . -- "~ . ' - mac—a ev. Hun-n".-- an .... nu”-.. w. J.-.‘ . "' ~ ~< ~ - ~ ~~ve~a~~~~um ..--.~at — a ... . . . _ .. - «. .- I-I-D - ~ I hi'-~a- .. A- ”I ‘U ‘ D. .- O~O~U~ ’t ‘~ 1 I CI- .- ~ A. K 0. en‘: m‘-| O' ' r1 N I .- q i.“ *'§.-.”-IM '9'“... I'm 9 1.. . ~~ ‘ .4 - . - cu..." - I“~u---—.-D-o.. .~—o-. -O—v--~».' a ._ - ~ .-- A4 . a l ., _ . ., . I . J " ' "u';: f‘ “ tr. ' . I. ‘ " U . .-.-a. '1 ._ —._ - . . . . 9' w . - . ~r . a " . - . ., u . ‘ ‘ ~ I) . - v , (, \‘ .. a . ‘ . ._ . :fl, r 19 ‘ ,(, - : . ‘ ‘ A . v -“ Il—- - - n»..- .... -... ---.-... . .» . - . , . .. ., . ~"-.... -“~~-~.-" ‘07 I. O I ' , v , - o... nu-ku-vue—W- 7 ~ Ia- . ‘ _ . .- y. .--—-—-~¢-— a”- co... » .. - . . .. -. . ~. ., , a , ,....-¢ uh..~\‘_~- 0. ->-c-.- ——.--—~._ .-—. a. .. . . -... — _ , -v man *0._ ~4—o-«--r——'W.q ,» u ‘g — —.~ 5. - .- ~ - 7 - . -. ,. r".‘.~- ---—o-.—-o-v-~.~—- -- e- . ._-_- , .— v ~— . v.- 13. What suggestions do you have for the university dairy or food science depart- ments in regards to the type, quality or duration of training that will better serve your employment needs? Please return to: Mr. Samel E. Rossi Dairy Plant Michigan State University East Lansing, Michigan 48823 r r.“ Asa. v hU Ta» 243 in. a. sh an . ‘4. ’V. I" Vim In fl .. 54‘ IHIHHIIHJIMHJHlyllsllljtfllflulflllUHHIIIIHIu 3 361