1962 – Watts


  • From Our President’s Desk, Dave Packard, 2.
  • Highlights–Management Conference
  • Eldred Named PACE Regional And Major Gifts Peninsula Chairman, 2.
  • PAECO Solid-State Invertor Delivers Dependable Standby Power For General Electric’s Nuclear Power Systems, 4.
  • H-P in the Cable Business, 5.
  • Harrison Labs of Berkeley Heights (New Jersey Firm Specialists in High-Quality Power Supplies), 6.
  • ‘Typewriter-Like Carriage’–Key to -hp-‘s New Punch for Modular Cabinet Perforation, 8.


  • From Our President’s Desk, Dave Packard, 2.
  • H-P Instrumentation Plays Important Part In Glenn Space Flight
  • Earl Lipscomb Associates (First -hp- Marketing Subsidiary), 4.
  • PHOTO: Interior view of Lipscomb Associates’ TRAVELAB.
  • Reliability. . .Where It Counts, 6.
  • Hewlett-Packard PA System Goes 100% Solid State (Probably a First of Its type in the U.S.A.), 7.
  • Subminiaturization (A Space Age “Must”), 8.
  • Let H-P Put You on Easy Street (IRE Show), 11.


  • First -hp- Materials Management Seminar Slated For May, 2.
  • H-P Ltd. Growing Fast, 3.
  • Colorado Springs In Gear, 3.
  • at Zanzibar. . .at Kano. . .at Guayamas. . .signals from the first U.S. manned spacecraft were recorded on Sanborn instruments, 4.
  • April 7–Inauguration Day For H-P’s New W. German Facility (GmbH), 6.


  • From Our President’s Desk, Dave Packard, 2.
  • IRE Show
  • Progress in Europe
  • First WEMA Management Seminar Set, 3.
  • The Milwaukeematic, A Solution to a Problem (A New Approach That Complements, Not Competes With, Able Machinists), 4.
  • Report–1962 IRE Show (“Easy Street” Theme Pays Off), 6.
  • Corporate-Wide Services Now Available Through New Systems and Procedures Group, 8.
  • Hewlett-Packard’s Design Engineering Team Alcoa Award Winner for ’62, 9.
  • Seminar Time, Geneva Style (HPSA’s Fourth Annual European Sales Seminar Biggest and Best In Every Respect), Bill Doolittle, 11.


  • From Our President’s Desk, Dave Packard, 2.
  • Fiscal year to date
  • Packard Keynote Speaker at Carmel WEMA Seminar, Speech in which he notes “more businesses die of indigestion than starvation.” 3.
  • H-P Aids Nimbus Program, 4.
  • Hewlett-Packard Vertriebsgesellschaft – H-P’s West German Sales and Service Facility, 6.
  • Field Engineering Reps Facilitate H-P Customer Service, 8.
  • Results Reviewed on H-P’s First Materials Management Seminar, 10.


  • From Our President’s Desk, Dave Packard, 2.
  • New product programs
  • H-P Enters New Product Line Field (First Invertor Rolls Off Paeco Line), 3.
  • H-P’s Ad Program Represents Positive Communications Approach, 6.
  • H-P (Canada) Limited – Hewlett-Packard’s Newest International Sales and Service Subsidiary, 8.
  • H-P’s European Growth Supported by Active Advertising Program, 11.


  • From Our President’s Desk, Dave Packard, 2.
  • Profit level better
  • The Development of People–An -hp- Key Corporate Activity, 4.
  • Moseley of Pasadena for X-Y Recorders (First -hp- Affiliate), 6.
  • S. Sterling Company Completes New Headquarters Facilities, 8.


  • From Our President’s Desk, Dave Packard, 2.
  • the move toward divisionalization
  • Hewlett-Packard Sales, Earnings Up For First Nine Months, 3.
  • Loveland Plant Dedication Slated for October 13, 4.
  • WESCON Easy Street a Smashing Success Both Artistically and Commercially, 6.
  • Dymec Shows New 2010D at WESCON (A New Offering in Digital Systems Field), 8.
  • Microwave Modulation and Demodulation of Light Demonstrated at Stanford University, 9.


  • COVER PHOTO: Bill Hewlett accepts President Kennedy’s “E-for-Export” Award from California’s U.S. Senator Clair Engle.
  • From Our President’s Desk, Dave Packard, 2.
  • “E” Award
  • Export “E” Award Made to H-P–One of 15 California Firms to Receive Coveted Citation, 4.
  • Seven More Sales Reps To Affiliate With H-P, 6.
  • Voice of the H-P Laboratories, 8.
  • Hewlett-Packard Microwave Staff Authors Textbook (Title: “Microwave Theory and Measurements”), 10.
  • H-P Aids Successful TELSTAR Program–Appreciation Extended By Bell Laboratories, 11.


  • From Our President’s Desk, David Packard, 2.
  • Changes in sales function
  • Boonton, Paeco Assume Divisional Status, 3.
  • Loveland Plant Dedication Attracts 9000, 4.
  • Governor Officially Opens H-P’s New Colorado Facility, 5.
  • Robinson Sales Division of West Conshohocken, PA (One of -hp-‘s Newest Marketing Units), 6.
  • How H-P’s Apprentice Program Develops Reservoir of Skilled Manpower, 8.
  • Clement Receives Top Design Award, 10.


  • Hospital Board Honors Hewlett, 2.
  • Hewlett-Packard S.A. 1962, 4.
  • Neely Enterprises — H-P Sales Arm for california, Arizona, Nevada and New Mexico, 6.
  • Stanford Linear Accelerator Center (AEC-Sponsored Basic Research Project to be completed by 1967), 8.
  • Advanced Mechanization Helps Expedite Knob Processing, 10.


  • From Our President’s Desk, Dave Packard, 2.
  • the year in review
  • Waltham Round-Table Discussion Held by Key Sales Personnel, 3.
  • Horman Associates — H-P Sales Team for Washington, D.C., Maryland, Delaware, Northern Virginia, and Eastern West Virginia, 4.
  • -hpa-: Brains for Sale, 6.
  • A New Look at Marketing Training, 8.
  • H-P in the News (features appearing in the December issues of Fortune and Reader’s Digest), 10.

1962 – HP Journal Index

January 1962 v.13 n.5
The Transistorized RC Oscillator, by David S. Cochran. 204B.

New One Watt TWT Amplifiers for more rapid Microwave Measurements, by George W. C. Mathers, pg 4-6. 489A, 491C, 493A, 495A.

February 1962 v.13 n.6
A New Digital Voltmeter Having High Rejection of Hum and Noise, by R. A. Andersen. 2401A.

A Versatile Digital Recorder for BCD Data, by Ed A. Hilton, pg 5. 562A.

A Digital-to-Analog Converter with High Output Resolution, by Ed A. Hilton, pg 8. 580A.

March 1962 v.13 n.7
A New Scope Plug-In for Convenient Measuring of Fast Switching Times, by Kay B. Magleby. 186A.

The Kilomegacycle Sampling Oscilloscope, by Roderick Carlson, pg 4. 185B, 187B.

A Digital System for Automatic Measurements of Switching Times, by H. C. Stansch, pg 6. DY-5844C.

April 1962 v.13 n.8
A New 50 MC Oscilloscope Based on an Advanced CRT Design, by Floyd C. Siegel. 175A.

Vertical Plug-Ins, pg 4. 1750A, 1752A, 1753A.

Horizontal Plug-Ins, pg 5. 1780A, 1781A, 1782A, 1783A.

May/June 1962 v.13 n.9-10
A Phase-Locking Synchronizer for Stabilizing Reflex Klystroms, by Albert Benjaminson. DY-2650A,

A New Wide-Application Klystron Power Supply, by Robert C. Allan, pg 5. 716A.

An Oscilloscope Camera with "Black Light" Graticule Illumination, by James A. Chesebrough, pg 8. 196B.

July 1962 v.13 n.11
The Present Attainments of Adjustable Power Supplies. Harrison Laboratories.

Representative List of Harrison Power Supplies, pg 8

August 1962 v.13 n.12
A DC-500 KC Oscilloscope with Extended Measurement Capabilities, by John Strathman. 130C.

September 1962 v.14 n.1
A New Generation of High-Speed Frequency Counters, by Tracy S. Storer, Charles M. Hill. 5243L, 5245L, 5251A, 5253A, 5261A, 5262A.

Counter Plug-ins, pg 4. 5251A, 5253A, 5262A, 5261A.

October 1962 v.14 n.2
A New Pulse Generator with Very Fast Rise Time, by Charles O. Forge. 215A.

Measuring Small, Stray L and C with Nanosecond Pulses, by Charles O. Forge, pg 6

November/December 1962 v.14 n.3-4
A Solid-State Operational Amplifier of High Stability, by Robert J. Strehlow. DY-2460A

Amplifier Plug-Ins, pg 3. DY-2461A-M1, DY-2461-M2, DY-2461A-M3, DY-2461A-M4.
A Portable Frequency-Response Test Set, by Don A. Wick, pg 6. 3550A.

1962 – Packard Speeches

Box 2, Folder 49 – General Speeches


February 28, 1962, What Management Wants to Know About New Product Proposals, AMA, Chicago


2/28/62, Typewritten speech on above subject given by Packard.

“There is no subject more important for the manager of today than the problem of generating good new products unless it be long-range planning, and the two subjects are hardly separable.” Packard feels this interest in new products “has implications of larger significance. The survival of the free enterprise system will probably depend in the end on its ability to provide a better life for the people in the society which supports it. There has been much talk about the need for accelerating the growth of our economy. Behind this lies the need to continually improve the conditions for all of our citizens here at home – to demonstrate to the doubting part of the world that a free society can accomplish this mission better than can a socialist society….In this regard the ability of American management to improve its efficiency in translation of the advancing storehouse of new knowledge being generated from research into profitable new products could well be the major factor in accelerating the growth of our economy.”


Following this opening Packard says his “experience in this specialized area is limited to the new product program at the Hewlett-Packard Company and so I would like to tell you something about what we have been doing there, and then attempt to give you some general idea of how we go about the job.”  Packard explains that HP activities are “devoted exclusively to the development and manufacture of general purpose electronic measuring instruments. About 20% of  our sales are to the government agencies, largely in defense and now space. At least 25% of our sales go to prime contractors for the government, about 15% go to foreign markets, mostly Europe, while the remaining 40% goes to a wide variety of commercial customers generally in the industrial field.”


“Our sales have grown from an annual rate of 2.3 million in 1950 to the current annual rate of 100 million in 1962.” Packard acknowledges that some of this growth was from acquisitions but “all of the companies we have acquired are making the same general class of product, and have had most of their growth from new products generated during this same period.” Packard says that “most of the products we were making in 1950…we are still making today. But those products including a few which have been redesigned will account for only about 5% of our total sales in 1962. To maintain even this level of sales from technical products over a 12 year period has required some redesign, considerable quality improvement, strong effort in sales and service – and of course a good group of products to begin with. But with what might e considered a reasonable good job in management other than new product development our sales would, as I see it, have increased from 2.3 million to 5 million in more than a decade. This means over 90 million in sales we expect in 1962 will come from new products developed during the past 12 years. The general pattern of each new product – if it is a good one – and we will have to admit to a failure now and then – but each good new product will build up in volume over about a two year period and then reach a sales level that will remain relatively steady over a useful product life of often ten years or more…”


Packard describes the criteria they use in evaluating new product proposals and summarizes these in question form:

“1. Is it our main field of interest – is it a measurement device?

2. Is it a general purpose instrument – is it likely to have a broad market?

3. Is it a significant contribution to the field of measurements?”


Packard explains that “As a company grows it is not possible for the President or the top vice-presidents to continue to be in on the consideration and approval of each new product – this responsibility can be delegated to the division management,”  but he adds that they must use the above criteria and top management will take part in continuing evaluations of the project.


Packard says “There are some more specific criteria which we use to test each project which is proposed.”


“First as to policy – we believe that a good research and development department must be established on a stable long-term basis. For that reason we establish a level of activity which we believe can be maintained over a long period of time this entire activity is supported out of current income and is established in the general range of 6% to 8% of our sales dollar. This determines the number of scientists and engineers we have in the company and we add new people for this activity on the theory – and likelihood – we will have a long term opportunity for them.”


“The management responsibility here then is to see that this group of people are working on the most promising projects. Toward this end we make the best guess we can as to the probable development cost. Although we do not keep budgetary control, we do keep accurate cost records on each project. We also estimate the sales volume over a five year period and the profit we think we can establish. Our experience shows us that we should expect to obtain at least five dollars profit ever a five year period for each dollar we spend on development.”


“We have often considered the question of putting a large task force on a given project and hopefully accelerating the development, versus putting a smaller task force and allowing extra time. There seems to be no general rule that works best although we are tending to use larger groups today than we felt necessary”


“Another specific consideration we give to each project is whether we have the total capability to put the project through all stages of engineering. Often we find that we have a bottleneck in tooling or in some special production techniques, and we are anxious to see that these matters are properly considered on each individual project.”


Another important consideration which Packard discusses is that “…there be thorough communication between the people who understand the requirement, usually your marketing people, and the people who are going to do the development – your scientists and engineers. ….It is a major responsibility of management to establish the structure and atmosphere for this communication to be maintained during the course of each project.”


“And finally the matter of motivation. The new product process is a creative endeavor. Your people are being charged to do something that has not been done before. After all they aren’t sure how they are going to do the job when they start. This is especially true on products that involve important contributions to the field. Enthusiasm goes a long way and must be sustained if the project is to be really successful Often the simple fact that you top management people take an interest in a project – a continued interest – can be an important factor in generating the enthusiasm and sense of importance to the development team that will spell the difference between success and failure – or in the time necessary to get the job done.”


“This job of producing a continual stream of outstanding new products for the future is probably the most important and most challenging job in management today.”


March/April, 1962, Two letters from Packard and ten from his Secretary, Margaret Paull, sending copies of the above speech to people who requested same.




Box 2, Folder 50 – General Speeches


November 8, 1962, What the President Wants to Know About Technical Programs, AMA,

Los Angeles

11/8/62, Handwritten notes by Packard for this speech.

Packard makes some general observations about American Industry.


“a. We have progressed from [an] economy based on raw materials and       energy of manpower to an economy based on brainpower. No only new       devices, but also service.


“b. We do ourselves a disservice to measure our growth in GNP- steel        production – carloadings – etc. [There is] much evidence to demonstrate         that our standard of living has grown faster than GNP or conventional        indicators.


“c. One of [the] most important characteristic of [the] American economy is its unique ability to convert new knowledge into products that have


1.Usefulness (in concept)

2. Quality (in practice)

3. And as a result real value to the buyer.


“And so in many ways the Technical Programs of our companies are the most important programs we have to insure Stability and Growth to our companies.


“The magnitude of R&D spending is not an adequate measure of the value to technical effort but it is important for any given business to have a technical effort commensurate with the level for its segment of the industry.


“And the range is wide.

[For] all manufacturing [R&D spending runs] 4% -1/2 Gov’t financed, 1/2 company financed.


Food less than 1%

Industrial Chemicals 6%

Scientific instruments 7% 1/2 [government funded], 1/2 [company funded]

Electronics & Communications 10% 2/3 Gov 1/3 Company

Aircraft 20% 7/8 Gov 1/8 Company.

“And as a final generalization it is important to recognize that:


The character and success of your technical programs todaydetermines      perhaps more than any other factor the character and success of your           business tomorrow.”


Moving to a description of the way things are at Hewlett-Packard Packard describes the business at HP as “Electronic Measuring Instruments. In terms of above classifications Scientific Instruments & Electronic & Communications.”


“We devote about 10% of sales dollar to R&D – more than 9% Company sponsored & less than 1% Government supported


“Sales without acquisition 1952 –  5 million

With acquisition 1962 – 100 million

“If we reconstruct acquisition back to 1952 [the sales would be] 18 million to 100 million or 5 times growth in 10 years.


“Growth has been primarily [the] result of new products from R&D. More than 1/2 of 1962 volume is from instruments developed & put into production since 1957 – 5 years.


“[There is] ample evidence that even the relatively good group of products we had in 1957 would have produced only minor growth… – not considering new products


“We have established some general criteria to guide this program


1. We concentrate all effort in area of electronic instrumentation – General   Purpose.

2. We back up technical program directed electronic instrumentation with                           specialization in

a. Manufacturing – facilities know how – quality control                                                       emphasizing needs of this field


b. Sales Program – Selection of people – training – service oriented                            to the instrumentation area.

3. We place emphasis on making an important contribution in the field.


a. Example of oscilloscopes where [there was a] good market –                                 [and we] tried to go in by “brute force” doing the job just as well –                              not successful.

b. Same area where we made a very important technical                                            contribution – good value – good profit.


c. We have seen examples where competition has attempted to do                           same in our field – copy products – add frills – no success – now                                  selling out on fire sale basis.


“The success of a technical program depends first on [the] selection of [the]right new product projects. We (WRH and myself) were very close to this & personally involved. Several years ago [it became] evident that we could not personally participate in [the] evaluation of each program.


[We] tried to have review meetings, [but it] took two days just to go over [the] briefest review of every project. King Solomon feeding all animals.


“As a result, established criteria [and] assigned responsibility on divisional basis for product areas. Criteria:


Profit over five year product life [divided by] the cost of development should average 5-6/1. May be reasons why 1 or 2/1 will be acceptable. A good product can be 10 – 20 to 1.


“Divisional responsibility


Group of people concentrating on all factors in a given product area. Close             coordination between technology of that area – manufacturing capabilities      and market problems.


Motivation that comes from small group of people having opportunity  to             do something where they can enjoy result of their success.


“In the matter [of ] the President



1. Establish well defined objectives

a. Concentration on instrumentation

b. Make important contribution


2. Provide environment where capable people can work toward those objectives with freedom and with enthusiasm.


“In answer to the question “What the President wants to know about technical programs:

He wants to know that they are at a level which will make it possible for    his company to keep up with the industry.


He wants to know they are taking his company in the direction he wants to           go.

He wants to know they are being accomplished with some measure of        success in terms of adequate profits for each dollar of expenditure.”

10/29/62, Letter to Packard from Philip Marvin AMA,  Asking if Packard would be willing to serve as chairman for the half-day session at the November 8 conference where Packard is to speak.

10/31/62, Copy of letter to Philip Marvin, AMA, from Packard saying he would be willing to serve as chairman for the half-day session.

11/19/62, Letter to Packard from Philip Marvin, AMA, thanking him for participating in the AMA California program.

Box 1 Folder 20 – HP Management


January 5, 1962, Sixth Annual Management Conference, Monterey


12/19/61, copy of a typewritten letter to Dean Ernest C. Arbuckle from Dave Packard expressing the hope that Arbuckle will be able to join the conference. Packard says they intend to spend most of the day discussing how various service functions fit into the total organization – particularly marketing and engineering. Packard expresses the hope Arbuckle can come.

1/5/62 Copy of the agenda for the conference.


Box 1, Folder 35D – HP Management

2/23/62, Copy of internal HP memorandum from Lee Seligson to Barney Oliver reminding him of his scheduled participation in a forthcoming two day conference for engineers. Seligson summarizes the speakers and topics.. Attached are some pages handwritten by Packard outlining his remarks.


Packard lists such topics as:


Balance sheet analysis

Engineering overhead – trends

General course for the future

General problems of Divisionalization

Geographical problems

Opportunities for engineers

Importance of New Product Development on Growth of American Industry

Undated, early 1962, Handwritten notes by Packard titled: “Sales Meeting Speech”


“Thanks everyone for help in making 1961 a good year.

“1961 was a year of change






Time & Frequency

“New products – We intend to continue to push our capabilities into other areas in future.

“Our success this far has been the result of:

Excellent performance in the detail of day to day job.

The enthusiasm of everyone

A good sense of direction  – a common purpose

We have developed a good ability to keep one eye on the ruts in the road and the other eye on the stars.


“Gentlemen, we intend to continue to build the Hewlett-Packard organization from the clerk to the scientist  – from the janitor to the salesman – from transducers to systems – from audio oscillators to sampling oscillators – in every area in which we are engaged – into the best, hardest hitting, most capable company in the world.


“If there is anyone here in this room today who can’t help us get this job done – we’ill damn well find someone who can!”

1962 – Hewlett Speeches

Box 1, Folder 28 – General Speeches


March 5-6, 1962 – Background of HP Development Program, HP R&D engineers

This was a general training program for engineers – and over 400 attended the day at a local hotel. Several managers spoke, including both Hewlett and Packard. There are two speech outlines in this folder. The first is clearly for the conference on March 5 – the second may have been prepared for another training seminar at an earlier date. Both are covered below.


3/5/62, Outline of first speech handwritten by Hewlett on notepaper


I   Introduction

Will talk about the R&D programs in general terms – its importance to the Company, what it costs, and return on investment. Source of projects and where ideas come from. How projects are scheduled.


II   The Vintage Chart – based on HP parent – instruments only

A)   Comparison of 1954 products to 1961

1)   Same items 13 mil, now 18 mil

2)   In 7 years new products have added 30 mil – 2 ½  times larger


B)   Life History of a product

1)     Fast start – peak – tail off

2)     Considering products in production in 1954

a)     1955 – 100%

b)    1958 – 81%

c)     1961 – 56%


C)  How is HP doing – Comparison-wise?

1)     HP 14.5 in 1955 to 49 in 1961 = 3.4 : 1

2)     U.S. Mil. & Ind. 3.25 in 1955 to 8.19 in 1961 = 2.5 : 1

3)     In six years have increased penetration 35%, or 5%/year

4)     Validity of U.S. Mil.-Ind. 1954 to 1960

a)     U.S. 2.44

b)    Electronics market data 2.27


D)  Return on Engineering $

1)     Cost of Engineering 1955 thru 1961: $16M

2)     Increased sales 1955 thru 1961: 92 ½ M

3)     Assume pre-tax profit to be 17%, profit would be $16M

4)     Run down 5 year life  4:1, 10 year life 7:1


E)   Effect on Development Policy

1)     Engineering one of greatest assets – must use wisely

2)     Specials uneconomical – Dymec

3)     Effect of military contracts – policy


F)   Factors determining proper level of R & D

1)     Conservation practices – payout in three years, 3/4 of growth    is from industry [?], ¼ from penetration. If doubled engineers effort would require 5 fold increase in penetration rate.

2)     Rate at which we can assimilate new people and train leaders from within – also space

3)     Mention a balanced staff

4)     A level that we might maintain even if the industry took a turn for the worst


III   Source and Selection of Products


A)     Basic policy: Make a contribution to art: scopes

B)     Obvious field requirement 606 sig. gen., 560 printer, scopes

C)     Logical extension of line: 614-616-618 sig. gen.

D)     Matching requirements and techniques: 650, 202A, 428, 524, 185 sampler scope

E)      “Redesigns”: 400D, 400H, 400L, 96G, 80G, 110G, 100G,

F)      External Sources: 803 bridge, 415 USWR, noise factor, 721 power supply, sampling recorder

G)     Project Selection

1)     Seat of pants – own best judge – basic contribution

2)     Factor of merit – modifying factors

3)     Support of total line


IV   Character of recent projects and instruments


A)     Reliance on proprietary components

1)     Better performance

2)     Protection

3)     40% of equipment now use proprietary components

B)     Integrated Electro-mechanical design

Microwave – sig, gen, recorders, clock

C)     Vast increase in sophistication

1)     More performance – simpler operation

2)     Requirement to work as part of system

3)     Greater reliability – customer should not field test


V   Problems


“What are the most pressing problems facing HP? In the case of R&D it is organization.


“How can we set up so that we may have all the advantages of flexibility of a small company, and still capitalize on advantages of large one?


“How can we provide an environment in which you can contribute both to the individual engineer…and also stimulate the basic thinking that leads to technical breakthrus that lead to new families of instruments?


“How can we organize so that all the steps necessary to carry a project from conception to production can be planned and executed so that this total cycle will take a minimum of time thus reducing costs and guarantee maximum mileage out of new ideas?


“When Warner of BTL [Bell labs?] was out here last month he commented to Dave that ‘It was generally understood that HP had the best capability in circuit design of any organization in the country.’ We intend to retain the reputation.”



Undated, outline of second talk to engineers


I)  Professional Judgement


A)    New trend in Eng. Education

B)     Corollary in industry

C)     [?]

D)    Means open for professional development

1)   Formal

a)     Honors Coop

b)    College extension

c)     HP policy not to give [training] material that is available on outside


2)   Informal

a)     Technical reading, Stoft program, discussion with colleagues

b)    Technical talks


E)     Application of knowledge


Collection of knowledge for collection sake is fruitless and stupid. The important element is application of knowledge. Application leads to more creative work – better and more creative work leads to advancement. I would like to point out there is a great deal of lateral movement.

II)   Personal Development


A)   Professional Societies

1)   Make contacts that are so important later on

2)   Gives experience in working with diverse group

3)   Forced feeding by listening to papers

4)   Is a responsibility to support anyway


B)   Community Activities – Church, government, charities

1)     These are important functions and deserve support – it is company policy

2)     How does it help you

a)     Get engineer out of his shell

b)    Provide an opportunity to develop a broader base of thinking – to develop the necessary logic for conviction and vital experience selling and putting over your position – this is essential as a good supervisor both up and down

c)     You learn to work with people


C)   Reading

1)   Business related

Organization Man

Management Theory

Technical Manager

3)      Non-Business, Non-Fiction – U.S. and World around

Ugly American, Nation of Sheep

Rise and Fall of the German Reich


How much history have you read since school?

What do you read in the newspapers each day?

What do you think is the solution to the segregation         problem – to unemployment?

Should the U.S. work towards a general dismantling of tariffs?


Become interested in some special subject of great personal satisfaction

4)     Theater, opera, symphony, folk dance – take season seats


“It all comes down to the question of motivation. You can become a happy, uninformed, obsolete vegetable, or you can be a creative productive engineer or manager with a keen interest in the world around you and what makes it tick.

“One requires nothing more than an 8 hour day at the plant, and a TV at home. The other requires a dedication to self-improvement and a willingness to allocate and schedule time and effort for this purpose.


“One leads to stagnation, one leads to advancement.”


3/5/62, Copy of a sheet containing charts of operations data

2/23/62, Copy of a memo from Lee Seligson to Barney Oliver discussing arrangements for the conference

2/27/62, Copy of a memo from Ray Wilbur to various managers outlining arrangements and the program for the engineering conference

February, 1962, Several lists and pages of questions submitted by engineers for the conference

Undated, copy of several pages of notes handwritten by Packard for an engineering development session



Box 1, Folder 29 – General Speeches


March 8, 1962 – “European Integration and the Industrial Electronic Industry,” World Affairs Council, San Francisco


(See also speeches dated September 13, 1960, April 14, 1961, and June 16, 1962)


3/8/62, Typewritten copy of Hewlett’s speech


Hewlett says he is like a “homespun economist” [one] “who develops basic ways of thinking on certain broad problems. It is in this context that I would like to comment about my views on the industrial strength of the U.S. and the factors that have affected it.”


Hewlett feels Americans may not be any more creative or smarter than people in other countries, nor work any harder. But he says the big advantage we have had “has been the tremendous mass market that exists within the U. S. The U. S. has tailored its economy to serve this mass market and as a result found itself in recent years with a considerable competitive superiority over other nations of the world who were denied this advantage….If the basic national requirements for a commodity are large enough in a given country to justify mass production and distribution techniques, it is pretty obvious that someone in that country will take advantage of this situation. In such cases, mass produced U.S. products will have greater difficulty in successfully penetrating such a market. A case in point as far as the electronic industry is concerned is that part related to consumer goods such as radios, TV, phonographs, and the like. As a group, these products have not kept pace with the rest of U.S. electronic exports.”


Hewlett explains that, in contrast to the radio and TV group, American industry finds its greatest advantage where its market in the U.S. is large enough to warrant mass production techniques, but the market in other major countries is below that threshold.  “An example,” he says, “is in another major sector of the electronic industry, the fields of industrial, scientific and military related electronics. In addition, domestic industry in this sector has full advantage of the very large Government expenditures resulting from our space and defense activities.” Taken as a whole, Hewlett points out that in the field of military and industrial electronics, the U.S. has had a commanding lead over practically any other country in the world. This is the area where HP operates.


Thus, when the Treaty of Rome was signed, and when the countries of Europe supported its provisions, “…it became pretty evident,” Hewlett says, “that the great advantage the American economy had had in the past, that of its mass market, would soon be shared with those countries within the European Common Market. To assess the situation Hewlett made a trip to Europe in 1958. “As a result of this visit,” he reports, “ I became strongly convinced that we should establish a manufacturing operation abroad, and at that time Germany appeared to be the logical country.”


Hewlett recalls the days after World War II when the U.S. put Europe “back on its feet. We taught them all we knew about production techniques and about modern management methods and they were very good students. In addition, due to war damage many of the plants abroad had much more modern equipment than their U.S. counterparts….In one area, however, either we did not teach them or they did not listen carefully, and this was in the field of marketing. I feel very strongly, and many people share this view, that American marketing practices are considerably ahead of those in Europe.” This encouraged HP to establish an “aggressive marketing organization in Europe in addition to the more obviously needed manufacturing unit,” according to Hewlett. So, implementing this course of action, a marketing centered organization was established in Geneva in the Spring of 1959 – with the first products “out the door” from the new European plant in the fall of 1959.


To show how successful the European venture was Hewlett cites some before and after figures. He says “In 1958, the year before we made our European move, we sold about 1.75 million dollars worth of equipment in Europe. Three years later, we sold 5.6 million or about a three-fold increase.”


Looking back, after 18 months of operation, Hewlett says the new plant “produced about $800,000 worth of equipment and is operating at a profit level which is quite comparable to our costs here despite the fact that due to unavailability of proper materials and components we have found it necessary to import almost 75% of such items from the U.S….All in all, I would say we are very pleased with the total program in Germany.


Moving on to discuss activities in England, Hewlett says that in 1961 they became “greatly concerned about the trend of our business in England. This was primarily due to the very strong protective tariff that exists for our type of products.” As a result, he says they decided to establish a plant near London. “It is really too early to comment on the success of this program but I think it is interesting to note that we felt it necessary to take this step.”


Concluding his remarks, Hewlett says “I would like to say that in the consumer electronics field, the rise of the ECM probably will have very little effect upon U.S. based industry. For the section of the electronic industry in the industrial and scientific fields, the ECM will continue to be a strong market for U.S. exports. Where production quantities are large enough to warrant, it will probably be desirable for many companies to establish their own manufacturing facilities abroad. I am bullish about the effect of the ECM on the electronics industry – at least for the next five years.”


3/8/62, Two pages of handwritten notes by Hewlett which appear to be the start of outline for this speech.



Box 1, Folder 30 – General Speeches


March 27, 1962 – “The Reciprocal Trade Agreements Program,” The House Ways and Means Committee, Washington D. C.


3/27/62, Copy of a typewritten text of Hewlett’s speech before the Committee




Hewlett says he appears before the Committee as a representative of the Hewlett-Packard Company,  which he says “is a concern specializing in the development and manufacture of precision electronic test and measuring apparatus. In size, we are one of the largest firms in the United States concentrating in its field. We employ somewhat over 5000 people and our gross sales last year were about 85 million.” And he goes on to tell where the major plants are, both in the U.S. and abroad. He says “Foreign sales are an important element of our operation as they account for approximately 14% of our total sales, or reduced to people, represent jobs for about 650 Americans.




Hewlett explains that HP’s principal customer “is the electronic industry itself, specifically those firms operating in the industrial, military and scientific fields….A realistic evaluation of the segment of the industry we serve, indicates that the United States is substantially ahead of the rest of the world in both technology and production practices.”


Hewlett mentions two major reasons why this is so. “Perhaps the first…is the increasingly large percentage of the military budget which is being spent in the electronics field. Much of the technology so derived becomes an important and exportable by-product of such spending and serves to give U.S. industry a great competitive advantage.…A second important source of technological competence is the very high general level of industrial research maintained by U.S. firms, specifically those in electronics. These factors combined with the increasing domestic demand for electronic products throughout industry, give every indication that U.S. electronics is going to maintain its superiority for a number of years ahead. What I am saying is that in a field like electronics, superior technology will demonstrate and that should tariff restrictions be reduced or eliminated, the U.S. would be in a position to increase substantially its balance of exports over imports.




Hewlett tells what two things HP did when it became apparent that the European Common Market would be a reality – “establish a manufacturing operation within the Common Market to protect against the adverse effects of foreign tariffs, and [secondly], …mount a major European sales program. The results since 1958 are of interest for total sales in Europe have increased four fold even though there is an average effective tariff against our products of about 20%. Had this tariff been lower, there is every indication that our exports from this country would have increased even more sharply. A corresponding reduction in U.S. tariff, we feel, would have had little effect upon our domestic sales. If we can compete successfully with foreign competitors in their own country we are certainly not going to worry about competition from them on our own home ground.


“Our experiences in the manufacturing field were equally interesting. Contrary to expectation, we found that by-and-large the quality of foreign electronic components, the basic building blocks of our assembly operation, were inferior to those of U.S. manufacture. To maintain comparable performance standards for our equipment, we have been forced to procure almost three quarters of such items from U.S. sources. I am sure that should European tariffs be reduced on such items there would be a substantial increase in their export from the U.S.


Hewlett says he wants to give another example of the adverse effect of foreign tariffs. “Most of the equipment we manufacture,” he says, “is classified by the United Kingdom as equipment that may enter duty free if there is no comparable product in the UK. If, however, such a product is available from local sources, then our product carries a 33 1/3% tariff. We enjoyed a sizeable and growing business with a certain class of instruments in England for which there was no local counterpart. Two years ago, a well known British firm introduced what appeared to be an almost identical copy of our instrument. We lost our preferred tariff rating and the sales on this instrument were reduced by fifty percent -–a dramatic indication of how U.S. exports can be affected adversely by foreign tariffs. Our only course was to either give up our position in the market or to set up a subsidiary to produce this item in England. We chose the latter course and I am happy to report the latest figures indicate that we have recaptured our position in this field, but it was done at the expense of setting up a second manufacturing facility in Europe long before we would have normally chosen to do so.




“The Hewlett-Packard Company is strongly convinced that House Resolution 9900 is a major and important step in liberalizing world trade. Should it be passed and implemented by the President, there is every indication that our exports would increase even further. We are not fearful of the effect of competition from foreign imports.”



Box 1, Folder 31 – General Speeches


April 2, 1962 – Boblingen Plant Dedication


4/2/62, Typewritten text of Hewlett’s talk


Hewlett says “It is with great pleasure that he and Mr. Packard take part in the dedication of this plant, our company’s first permanent home in Boblingen, indeed our first permanent plant outside the United States.”


He indicates they started negotiating for this site some two and a half years ago. “In the intervening period we have moved from temporary quarters in an old building on Karlstrasse to more modern quarters on Konigsbergerstrasse, and now to this fine building.” He thanks the many “fine people” who made the move possible.


“Many of you may not realize,” Hewlett says, “that not only was this our first foreign endeavor but that it was our first plant located away from our home city, Palo Alto. In establishing this operation we had much to learn, not only how to live and work in your country as good corporate citizens but also how to operate a truly independent manufacturing operation.”


He says about a hundred people are employed at this plant now, and “we are really proud of their skills and achievements. The production per employee has been rising steadily and is now equal to, or better than, several of our operations in the United States. [This], despite the fact that the production quantities are smaller than those common in the United States, making it more difficult to achieve a high degree of efficiency.”  Hewlett says the plant is now making over twenty-eight standard HP products, and more are coming.


An R & D operation has been authorized for the plant, he says. “We feel that by drawing on the fine engineering and technical schools of this country we will be able to set up a research and development program, that not only will design equipment for the European Market but will also form an important part of our total corporate engineering program.” He adds that they have enough land here to build three more buildings, and he sees the possibility of the first in “not too many years.”


Hewlett says that [Ray] Demere, an HP manager from the U.S., will be leaving shortly. He announces that Mr. Schroeder has been appointed as plant manager. “I am sure,” Hewlett says, “ that under his directorship this company will continue to prosper and grow as it did under Mr. Demere and will develop into one of the major plants in the Hewlett-Packard family.”


In closing, Hewlett says that they “have recognized the importance of the establishment of this plant by including a comment about it in our most recent ‘Quarterly Report of Earnings’ sent to all our shareholders as well as a picture of this building.”



Box 1, Folder 32 – General Speeches


May 7, 1962 – ”Electronics and Medicine,” Hewlett Club, San Francisco, CA


5/7/62, Outline of speech, handwritten by Hewlett

The following is a summary of topics listed in this outline.


Hewlett starts with a review of electronics and electronics in medicine. He mentions Galvani, Waller EKG in 1880, Eindhoven, Roentgen, X-Ray 1895.


Hewlett discusses various electronic applications in medicine:


EKG, X-ray, EEG, endoradiosona…?


X-ray, isotope, electronic bombardment, diathermy, defibrillator, coherent light

Monitoring Equipment

Operating room, recovery room, ICO

Automatic processing

Automated blood testing, blood cell counter, cancer cell studies

Data storage

EEG, group statistics – analysis and retrieval

Scientific and Instrumentation uses

Brain process, theory of vision, medical engineering and physician team, blood flow, circulation studies, reaction studies, muscle studies


Under Economic aspects of Medical Electronics, Hewlett lists return on engineering dollars, and the effect of hardware, computer people, bio-medical engineers


Some basic problems

Diagnosis and monitoring

How to get what is needed for data acquisition – fetal heart beat, blood flow, continuous blood pressure


How to determine if medical correlation exists between what we can measure and medical needs



Hewlett discusses the economics of medicine in modern society. He says “More and more people will have the right and the means for better medical care. The supply of doctors is limited – must find a way of utilizing M.D. more effectively.


“It is through education and people who are trained to see both sides of the problem.


“It is through research both within and without the university.


“It is through government support where the cost or the scope is too great for industry or the university to carry alone.


“HP has no interest [in this area], but this is where the government can really help in giving more medical care to more people.”



Box 1, Folder 33 – General Speeches


June 14, 1962 – Talk to University of California School of Business Administration, Berkeley, CA


6/14/62, Typewritten draft of speech with many handwritten notes by Hewlett-Packard


This speech is very similar to speeches dated March 8, 1960, September 13, 1960, and June 14, 1962. In this speech Hewlett again describes the HP organization, its products and the events that led to the decision to expand to Europe. He discusses  some of the difficulties in integrating into the European world. We will up pick the story here with their decision to expand further into England.


Hewlett says the decision to establish a plant in England was “partially forced by economic developments. Most of our products are classed by the UK as essential items and essential items of our type carry an import duty of 33% if there is a comparable item made in the country. If not, they come in duty free. On a major class of equipment, we had enjoyed this duty free status for several years, but a well known and reputable British manufacturer chose to produce an almost Chinese copy of our product, and thus impose on our imports a very heavy duty.”


“Our choice,” Hewlett says, “…was to [leave] the market or try to set up a manufacturing operation and compete there. We chose the latter course and I am pleased to report that the sales trend has now been reversed.”


In conclusion, Hewlett says that “it is certainly evident that we have benefited greatly from this expansion program. This year we will probably sell about $9,000,000 worth of corporate products in Europe.” He says “…that this program of ours in its own small way has contributed in a helpful sense to the U.S. balance of payment problem. Further, it is certainly not exporting jobs, on the contrary, it has generated more jobs at home.”


He says the U.S. Government’s policy on taxing foreign earnings really “bugs” him.  “We must look forward to the country drawing ever closer to a community of free nations. We must be prepared to accept changing trade patterns throughout the world. For every dollar we lose in foreign trade balance in one area we must be picking up two in some other area. The people of U.S. must understand this. The industry of U.S. must understand this. The government of the U.S. must understand this and support it not by just words but by its actions.


“We are at a critical time in the economy.”



Box 1, Folder 34 – General Speeches


August 13, 1962 – Statement to Palo Alto City Council re Palo Alto Hospital


8/13/62, Very cryptic outline of comments prepared by Hewlett for his remarks, all in his handwriting. He discusses the needs for medical care in the Palo Alto area and the facilities available to furnish it. [See also his speech to the Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce on the same subject, dated January 4, 1959.]



Box 1, Folder 35 – General Speeches


October 10, 1962 – Role of R & D in Future Profits, IRE National Electronics Conference Panel, Chicago IL


Hewlett was invited to be a member of this panel, the objective of which was stated to be ‘…to stimulate research and development in electronics and to create a better understanding between industry and the universities in regard to the advancement of the electronics science….’


10/10/62, Outline of speech handwritten by Hewlett.

Hewlett’s outline starts with a section on the role of R & D in past profits. He lists  these topics:

Analysis of past return on R & D

Effect on present policy

Contribution of new products to growth


Under a section on the Role of R & D in future profits

Proper level relative to one’s industry

$ established by industrial patterns


The third section is titled Getting the most out of your R & D

Quality of people

  1. More R & D demands highest quality of people – best minds, best training, most creative
  2. Proximity to centers of learning is important
  3. Rapid tempo of change in our technical world demands sound fundamental training in sciences
  4. No “all chiefs and no indians” setup, must have full spectrum of personnel for advanced research of top technical and production engineering staff.



  1. One of the finest motivations is the personal intellectual challenge – the selection of projects, the assignment of people
  2. Conviction of the value of the program and what they as individuals can contribute
  3. Recognition. A job well done, association with a successful product, pay


Program Selection

  1. Importance of a device that does an old job a better way, or that does a brand new job
  2. The importance of leading, vis-a-vis capitalizing on a breakthrough


Project Administration

  1. Flexible administration
  2. Discontentment reflects NIH [not invented here] factor


R&D is important and can pay off


There will be a practical limit to how many $ can be spent


If these two facts are true – then the laurels will go to those companies who can select and attract the best people, and who can stimulate and direct these people in the most effective and efficient fashion.


It is a challenge to management.


10/5/62, One typewritten page listing  product  and production data evidently put together by Hewlett

10/9/62, Copy of a one page typewritten program describing the panel discussion and listing the panelists

6/5/62, Letter to Hewlett from Frank Waterfall, HP’s sales representative in Chicago. He asks if Hewlett would be interested in participating in the IRE panel discussion, and mentions having panelists who could tell of “success stories” emphasizing the importance of R & D.

6/19/62, Copy of a letter from Hewlett responding to Frank Waterfall’s letter above. Hewlett says: “Every time someone wants me to talk about a success story I shudder. I feel this subject is so overworked that I simply can’t develop any enthusiasm to expound on the incredible foresight that Dave and I had some 234 years ago about the future of the electronic industry. Nor to get up before a crowd of people and publicly acclaim that I am one of the smartest guys you have ever seen.”

6/21/62, Letter to Hewlett from Angus A. MacDonald of IRE Asking if Hewlett will participate in their panel discussion.

7/2/62, Letter to Hewlett from Cletus Wiley asking if Hewlett plans to submit an abstract of his remarks ahead of time

7/17/62, Copy of a note from Hewlett to MacDonald saying: “If I run true to form on this one, I won’t have a draft copy until the night before. I’m sorry I can’t accommodate you further on this point

8/24/62, Copy of a letter to panel participants from the Panel organizing committee discussing approaches to the subject of R & D

8/28/62, Letter to Hewlett from Jean Paul Mather of the Purdue Research Foundation extending an invitation to join other panelists for lunch on October 9

9/21/62, Letter to Hewlett from Jean Paul Mather saying the proposed luncheon on October 9 has been cancelled.



Box 1, Folder 36 – General Speeches


October 13, 1962 – Talk at the Dedication of the Loveland Plant, Loveland, CO


10/13/62, Outline of remarks handwritten by Hewlett


Hewlett says HP has a partnership with the State of Colorado, the County and the Loveland community. He expands on this partnership theme under three headings:

Common objectives

Cooperation and understanding

Both partners receive a share of the benefits


Common Objectives – HP

  1. to build a sound autonomous division of parent company in a community that could grow and develop with it. Sometimes have to go slowly so will not have to step back
  2. To build as a firm foundation for long-term growth and not just for profit
  3. To provide stable employment



Cooperation and Understanding

  1. Mostly what HP has received
  2. Reason we came because you wanted us not because of concessions
  3. Understanding – Problems that our being here may cause – growth and expansion


Value Received

  1. HP
    1. Everything that a friendly understanding government can give – not just the big things, but the little things too
    2. Some of the hardest working and most concerned employees have  been associated with the feeling of being a part of something new and growing and important
    3. You have taught us the great advantages associated with an independently run geographically separated operation


  1. Community
    1. Balance of payments
    2. Opportunity for citizens of this growing community to find stable long-term job opportunity both for themselves and for children who wish to remain here
    3. Taxes