The Analytical Chemist expressions of opinion in regard to the need for recognition of the importance of the profession of analytical chemist have been received by the editor in response t o the invitation extended in the March and May issues of ~ X A L Y T I C A LCHEMISTRY (pages 145 and 289). Excerpts from several of these letters, which are quoted below, present gratifying evidence of the widespread interest of chemists in this matter. I t is hoped that as a result of these discussions definite steps will be taken to create a real appreciation of the contributions made by the analytical chemist to the advancement of the science of chemistry.
N
UMEROUS
OUR comments regarding the profession may well raise in ysome of its followers hopes rather the worse for near after unhappy experiences in academic and industrial work. It may be significant to consider some of the reasons why advanced degrees in analytical chemistry and undergraduate training in instrumentation are rare in colleges and universities . . The last valid excuse the nonanalyticgl memberp of chemistry aculties had for voting down the introduction of photometric analysis in undergraduate courses disappeared rrith the recent development of rapid-reading and inexpensive photoelectric colorimeters. A real difficulty remains in the way of using some of the slower-operating electrometric instruments in undergraduate courses not limited merely to chemistry majors. Changes in curricula such as you suggest are not easy to make. The teacher of analytical chemistry in many schools has responsibility for only the analytical courses and little opportunity to initiate changes in their subject matter, particularly if these changes involve the departmental budget. From many interviews with students, I know that the scarcity of advanced degrees in analytical chemistry is not due to lack of students of high ability who wish to do graduate work toward the Ph.D. in analytical chemistry. Moreover, the pages of ASALYTICALCHENISTRY and other journals testify that there is no lack of analytical chemists capable of planning, directing, and carrying to completion researches of service to all fields of applied and pure science. In view of the number and excellent quality of the publications in analytical chemistry, many presumably carried out with the aid of graduate students, how is it possible that the situation mentioned in item 2 of your editorial exists? Do analytical chemistry teachers enjoy seeing their graduate students turning out doctorate theses for M.A. degrees, while the students of some of their colleagues in the more widely publicized fields of chemistry are turning out M.A. theses for Ph.D. degrees? . Judging from my own observations, what the profession of analytical chemistry needs most is a fair practices code to protect its members and prospective members, and an organization to enforce the code. Perhaps analytical chemists in industry recognize a similar need.
+
+
would be no feeling of dissatisfaction. I t is awareness of this same thing that prompts many managements to retain one good analytical man, perhaps of Ph.D. caliber, and require him to majntain responsibility for and control over a handful of technicians. This arrangement, if properly handled, is entirely satisfactory to management but not to the ordinary run of analytical chemist who is forced to accept wages of the order of those rendered to the technicians. His only hope is to be so endowed by nature that he can prove himself to be in the top of his field. I can see where point I will be extremely difficult to get across. I agree 100% with point 2, since my limited experience indicates too little instrumentation in training and too little desire on the part of those Tho determine the curricula to recognize the needs of industry. Perhaps on point 3 I take a pessimistic viewpoint, but it is my feeling that the field is overstocked now. This fact, together with the availability of completely satisfactory technicians, is the cause of the low salaries paid the analytical chemist today. Regarding point 4, I consider it futile to talk to management in terms other than dollars and cents. If quality means more return, they can see some need for an analytical chemist, but usually they will not pay a salary approaching that of the researcher. If the researcher needs the aid of the analytical man, all right, but again his work and salary are subordinate. The reason the researcher enjoys a substantial return today is that management can readily visualize profit from the major part of his work. This is not so in the case of the analytical chemist.
+
+
+
DOES not appear to me that effort mainly directed to improving the status of the analytical chemist as such would change the circumstances of his economic and professional existence; the analytical chemist is always a subordinate figure in the industrial scheme. His work in industry is control work-serving to keep products to specification and process streams under control. His work in a large industrial research laboratory is a minor part of research studies or pilot-plant operation. Even though the analyst is brilliant in developing new methods to keep control of the research and furnish data to interpret its progress, the main interest is still in the progress of the research study of pilot-plant operation. Even when his studies are fundamental and evolve new standardized methods of analysis, thus allowing a new commercial process to come into being, the main consideration is the process. The very fact that analytical chemistry meets all its problems
IT
+
I agree with your program, and there is very little that I could add to it. My attitude toward the profession of analytical chemistry has been increasingly dubious for various reasons. Among them are the tediousness of routine control work, and the realization that a reasonably intelligent high school graduate could take over, doing better r7oi-k since there ASA whole
361
V O L U M E 19, NO. 6
362 with such little apparent effort helps maintain its unimportant place in the industrial scheme. I n my opinion, the personal future of the analytical chemist lies in abandoning analytical chemistry as a lifetime job. His work always will be subordinate and his economic status in a corresponding position. On the other hand, the personal attributes the analytical chemist has developed in his work are outstanding. He has learned thevalue of careful attention to detail. He has learned the value of making an analysis the right way the first time. He has learned to evaluate many conflicting variables and follow through with a single connected procedure to produce a desired result. Very often he has had to assemble all available information on a particular problem and think out beforehand the correct procedure to follow to obtain the answer. His inventive ability is whetted on the improvisation of new procedures to meet the problems of his work. He has become thoroughly familiar with processes and products involved in the industry in which he works, and an appreciable insight into the modern industrial establishment with which he is associated. He has been developed by his work into a well-informed man of matured character, judgment, and insight. It appears to me that the intelligence and know-how of the mature analytical chemist are sadly wasted. They can never be fully exploited when allowed to remain in the laboratory. What business is not in need of men of such qualifications in the more associated-with-profit, more remunerative part of their enterprise? Allow these assets, actually developed in the premises, further room to produce dividends! Why not in the sales division-the sales engineering divisionthe market research division-the process engineering divisionthe industrial relations division-the public relations divisionor any responsible job which should offer the analytical chemist a chance to demonstrate his ability to produce even more for his organization? In my opinion, ten years is as much time as any man should devote to analytical chemistry in an industrial job. The analytical laboratory should be a pool of manpower which should be tapped continually to serve the rest of the business. There are few analytical problems that could not be met by a staff of men with experience limited to between one and ten years. It thus seems that the program you outline should prove worth while only to the degree it should enhance the first ten years of the analytical chemist’s experience. I believe publicity attendant on the value of analytical chemistry as a stepping stone for more economic status and advancement in other fields is as important as emphasis on analytical chemistry itself. Let us publicize this value until industry will automatically consider the analytical laboratory a prime source of future management manpower.
+
+
+
editorial in the March AXALYTICAL CHEMISTRY the that “no university in the United States. . .grants the doctorate in analytical chemistry.” It would be equally true to say that no university in the United States grants the Ph.D. in organic chemistry or physical chemistry, because the Ph.D. diploma certifies simply that the recipient has the degree of doctor of philosophy. As far as I know, no field of specialization is ever specified on the diploma. If the editor believes that no advanced degrees are awarded to candidates who specialize in analytical chemistry, he is in error. Although analytical chemistry is a less popular field of specialization among candidates for advanced degrees than physical or organic chemistry, the number in this field has not shrunk to zero. Since 1930 Rutgers University has granted seven M.S. degrees and six Ph.D. degrees to students who specialized in analytical chemistry. Although I cannot state accurate statistics for other institutions it is highly probable that many universities such as Minnesota, Michigan, Illinois, Purdue, Princeton, and Harvard have produced masters and doctors with specialized training in analytical chemistry in much greater numbers than Rutgers. N THE
I editor expressed the belief
+
+
+
HIS letter is with relation to my hearty approval of your Tattempts to glamorize analytical research, in a measure a t least. It has always been a matter of considerable speculation in my mind why an analytical research chemist, almost without exception, receives no special recognition for proficiency in his field. . .The field of research has not been unkind to me and
I have no complaints as far as lily own outcome is concerned, but I early learned that one had to supplement his main interest by the accumulation of profitable side interests to help bridge the gap between a bare sustenance and earning power commensurate with that attained by experts in fields such as industrial, organic, and biological chemistry. . . There is not, to my knowledge, a t the present time a single representative of my field of research who is a member of the Kational Academy.. The analytical research chemist suffers from the lack of any official means of recognition for outstanding work in his field. The awards for scholarship, such as those fostered by Du Poiit, are seldom gained by the analytical research chemist and by fur the majority of these awards go to other fields. Yet, a t tlie present time, numerous requests are received from large chemical organizations for men capable of carrying on a broad research program in analytical chemistry.
.
+
+
+
conditions which you have described I personally have experienced. . . I wish t o congratulate you and also Secretary Emery on the improvements instituted in the publications and in SOCIETY policies and projects. I t seems that the services aimed a t the ordinary analytical chemist have been trebled I have watched with interest the growing realization in the A.C.S. that all is not economically well with the analytical chemist. . “Your SOCIETY”gave us the figures shoFing the membership breakdown according to type. We see that the range is from company and executive to student affiliate. The largest group is composed of research and control chemists, 28.0%; 6.77, of the SOCIETY’S membership is that of companies and executives. . .So I say that the course pursued by the present policies, editorials, and committee projects is the wisest if not the most direct. The minimum wage schedules as set up for the employment clearinghouse are of some benefit. It is good to pledge an employer-user of this facility to adhere to this minimum, but would it not be a good idea to ask those companies that have company or corporation memberships in the SOCIETY also to maintain their Kage levels a t the SOCIETY’S standards The idea of reprinting, your editorial in the S e w s to gain the eye of top management may be of value to the chemist in the chemical industries vhere top management is represented many times by a professional chemist, but what value has it for the chemist in controllaboratories in other industries? The only Fay to reach top management, and in small industries . .the owners are top management, is to write directly to those executives themselves and acquaint them nith the fact that they have in their employ members of the AVERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY. Point out to them the requirements for individual membership, the aims of the SOCIETY, the professional services it renders to employee and employer ultimately, and show them that their company is going to enjoy prestige among customers and competitors by maintaining a healthy and mutually advantageous relationship with these men. THE
+ + + I TI’AS interested
in your very worth-while editorial having to do with the profession of the analytical chemist. I do not know who wrote the original editorial, but. . , h e should not under any condition ask for a four-year undergraduate curriculum in analytical chemistry. He admits that a good analytical chemist must be an organic chemist, an inorganic chemist, a physical chemist, and a t times a biochemist, a metallurgist, a physicist, and a specialist in several other fields. I heartily agree that in order to obtain a fundamental education in these fields what is needed is a revamping of the regular chemistry curriculum and he must under no circumstances suggest developing a specialized curriculum that would go in the opposite direction, , . I know that specialized curricula never produce men who can attack problems where the need for a broad training is so important.
you write about conditions 25 years ago is certainly true of conditions 40 years ago. From 50 to about 25 years ago most of the experiment station directors were trained as chemists. There seems to have developed a resentment toward chemists in agriculture and now the WHAT
1 U N E 1947
363
policy framers are veterinarians, plant physiologists, agronomists etc. In general their attitude toward the chemists is “here, analyze this and tell us what it is all about but don’t ask any questions about the background. That is our problem and responsibility.” And all too frequently the possibilities and limitations of analytical chemistry as applied to the problem are not clearly recognized. It is very difficult to get a well-trained analvtical chemist now. Very few of the calege graduates now hive ever made the simplest kind of a mineral analysis. Granting the doctorate in analytical chemistry might help, but I doubt it. To a certain evtent it seems to me that high-grade analytical chemists are born, not made (trained). There was a remarkable nucleus of incomparable analytical chemists in the old Geological Survey-Gooch, Stokes, Hillebrand, Washington, and others who were a source of inspiration to the younger men of the A M E R I C CHEMICAL ~~N SOCIETY in their generation. They were not merely analytical chemists, but had very broad interests.. . General analytical chemistry is too darn hard work for the average pampered youth. He wants a short cut-something very easy. He shuns weighing on the analytical balance and prefers to guess at it with the spectrograph.
__
+
+
+
HE comments on the subject of “The Profession of Analytical TChemist” which appear in the March issue, together with the views expressed some six months ago, should provoke some reflection, on the part of not only analytical chemists but also those individuals concerned with direction of research activities and M-ith the profession of teaching-particularly cheniical education. It is rather distressing to note the aversion to analytical work which is generally shared by potential employees, especially so when it is considered that such individuals, particularly a t the undergraduate level, have such a limited knowledge of the scope embodied in industrial quantitative analysis. Fundamentally, the major portion of research activities consists in first finding some significant property or variable to measure, and then finding means of measuring the property or variable. I n many cases the two approaches are made simultaneously. When it is considered that quantitative measurements provide the means of evaluating the results of most research, the importance and necessity of placing the responsibility for such measurements in competent hands are clearly indicated. If chemistry students could be made to appreciate the diversity of problems lumped under quantitative analysis in industrial laboratories, analytical chemistry could be made a much more attractive field of specialization than it is a t present. Analytical methods and tools have developed to such an extent from the conventional analytical tools of quantitative analysis, such as the buret and balance, that a definite need exists for a second year of quantitative analysis in the undergraduate curriculum.
+
+
+
ou might have written from my seven years’ experience in ‘this large corporation laboratory. My foreman slipped the mailing cover off the ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY and slid this magazine across the balance table, where I was trying to weigh out to the fourth point. S o one else in this big plant will see this article except my two fellow analykcal chemists. A copy of this editorial mailed to the management and employment manager and to other executives would be of untold value to the profession. Why not have a technician’s division of the A.C.S., so that the men who really do the analytical work in industry could exchange views aithin the SOCIETY?
+
+
+
see the damage of unpreparedness for the technical the war years have caused in our technical and scientific younger generation, among our managerial financiers, and also among our professional teachers. I never hire a man with technical training unless he is a member of a technical organization. I insist and give adequate time to reading technical literature and take time to see if he has made use of it. I impress on him the fact that he must take part CAN
I future that
’
in the activities of his technical organizations and should visit national meetings. . . The making of the atomic bomb is in itself nothing else but analytical procedures and processes . . Today much of my work is concerned with chemical engineering of new processes in which analytical methods are the main guy wires through which the processes are put up and placed in production. I suggest that in one of the national meetings we lay aside all the small talk, all the little papers, and have only one meeting a day; the morning, on organization questions, work organization, analytical, synthetic, and group leader principles, and research and laboratory construction. Then the afternoon and evening might be used in discussion with chosen meeting captains in which members could speak their minds freely. Such a meeting should be held once a year; the other meeting should be a scientific meeting with reading of papers. I n such meetings n-e should let the “young ones” speak their minds; perhaps they can tell us some amusing tales about our own inconsistencies and turn into teachers by just opening their mouths. There are many managerial professional questions left unanswered which directors of research and other divisions ponder about, concerning the younger men, the profession, the public a t large, stockholders, and top executives. Such questions could be aired by inviting people to an evening seminar discussion of patents and patent rights, priority and senility, arteriosclerosis and table-tor, hammerineitis. tozether with the auestion of how to form the ithical policies of thcassociation as a kedium to give to all members highest professional standards demanding equal respect from public, political, and financial organizations , , Let’s have more discussions on analytical chemistry. T o me it is chemistry, and no process. no new idea, no new or marketable c o m r , o ~ n can d be -Droduckdaithout using - analytical . chemistrv, , , To meresearch and development and process construction are equivalent to military maneuvering. . .Yet there are no books, no courses, no real backing of research and development or process construction available to young scientists, nor is there much recorded on the tactics, techniques, strategy, history, imponderables, the logistics of moving matkriel, the political, diplomatic, ethical, and moral forces involved in fundamental, applied, and utility research, development, and process construction. Nothing or very little by only a few men is taught on the techniques of business research and organization, the educational and selective screening to obtain high-caliber personnel able to cope with personnel, social, national, and international problems in war and peace. No books nor much information is available on laboratory construction and functional organization and equipment. Certainly during the war we had very few able men with technical background in highest government offices. A
+
+
+
HE Profession of Analytical Chemist” seems rather amusing, Tinasmuch as it suggests the crying need for licensing chemists * as professionals, a matter which has been questioned rather lengthily of late. Reasons why the analytical chemist should be in lesser esteem than the university lecturer on chemistry may, as suggested, also belong in the realm of debate, but the practical remedy is to establish the prestige of the qualified analytical chemist. 14
+
+
+
I READ with great interest your editorial on “The Profession of
Analytical Chemist.” I t is of great interest to the British analytical chemists to observe that American analytical chemists are laboring under many of the same difficulties as we experience here and that you are striving to raise the status of the analytical chemist as compared with the research chemist and other members of the chemical profession. Unfortunately, in this country too, except in the case of a few of the more progressive firms, the analytical chemist is regarded as a routine worker who can contribute little to the productivity or efficiency of the company, and the enormous advances in the scope and technique of analytical chemistry are not fully realized. As in the United States, no college or university in this country specificall trains analysts and in very few colleges are specific courses oylectures given in either general analysis or special branches of analytical chemistry, and there is as yet no chair of analytical chemistry in any British university. The program which is indicated in your article is one which will appeal to my colleagues in this country and which I trust analytical chemists in this country will also adopt.
