The meetings never materialized. Since there were certain matters for which I needed authority I insisted on being appointed to the Board. I was told the bank would exercise its right to assume the major holding in a month, when I would become Managing Director. Two months passed without a word, and still I was in no position to control certain irregularities. Finally, I came to the conclusion that I had done what I had set out to do.
I had proved that people will respond to a fair and encouraging leadership; that the workforce, that is everyone, production and administrative, was not degenerate, but as good as whatever top management obtained. I am not arguing for the collective power of the production force, nor did I, in this experience, adopt any attitude based on this or any other such consideration.
I am not pro-labor. Naturally, from years of work in dealing with mismanagement, I have a tendency to be critical. I admit to protesting for years that managerially the country is badly served. After all a country is only as strong as its industrial resources, and what else do they depend on but management? So it is sad to conclude that, if you can take such a company as I have described as a representative example, then my experiment simply confirmed the long held view: "The fault lies at the top".