Elements of "Fordism" policy as a tool of anticrisis management in the Urals tank industry in the period of the Great Patriotic War | Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta – Tomsk State University Journal. 2017. № 425. DOI: 10.17223/15617793/425/17

Elements of "Fordism" policy as a tool of anticrisis management in the Urals tank industry in the period of the Great Patriotic War

The article covers the complex of social-economic transformations in the tank industry of the Urals in the period of the Great Patriotic War resulted from the implementation of the basic elements of the "Fordism" concept. The author analyses how these ideas penetrated into the USSR during the 1920s-1930s on the wave of Soviet-American economic cooperation and trade. The research stresses the significance of assembly line production in the region's economy modernization. The work reveals how, by adopting "Fordism", soviet authorities sought to mend the quality of management in the region's military industry. The author analysed examples of implementing specific technical, technological and social principles in the Ural tank industry which were typical of "Fordism". The author shows the relative effectiveness of introducing "Fordism". Nevertheless, Henry Ford's model was never fully implemented in the soviet reality, because it was considered a "bourgeois theory", not acceptable for the socialist economy. The system of non-flexible mass production created in the tank industry of the Urals and the USSR in the period of the Great Patriotic War turned out to be the most effective management method with the shortage of qualified personnel and lack of special equipment, raw materials and energy. It has been proved that the accelerated establishment and development of the tank industry in the Urals in 1941-1945 contributed to the solution of complex tasks of how to provide the necessary quality of military products. The introduction of the basic elements of "Fordism" into the socialist production was due to the significant amount of equipment manufactured in the United States and acquired by the USSR in the first "five-year period" to upgrade the fleet of industrial equipment. The system of no-flexible mass production, borrowed in the West, enabled the Soviet machine building industry to produce the necessary amount of modern military equipment, taking into account the limitations of the available industrial potential, mainly the relatively low-skilled staff. Experience in the implementation of the "Fordism" elements in the tank industry of the Urals in the period of the Great Patriotic War obviously demonstrates the need to accelerate transformation to a new "post-industrial" formation nowadays in order to maintain the leading positions of the region in the arms and high-technology machine building market. The analysis of historical experience demonstrates that despite a sufficient historical interval which has passed since the time of "Fordism" implementation, Russian military industry is still strongly dependent on equipment, technology and management concepts from the industrially developed Western countries.

Download file
Counter downloads: 191

Keywords

танковая промышленность, «фордизм», поточно-конвейерное производство, Великая Отечественная война, антикризисное управление, Урал, tank industry, "Fordism", thread-conveyor production, Great Patriotic War, crisis management, Ural history

Authors

NameOrganizationE-mail
Zapariy Vasiliy V.Ural Federal University named after the first President of Russia B.N. Yeltsinpantera.zap@gmail.com
Всего: 1

References

Jessop R. Regulation perspectives on Fordism and post-Fordism. 3 ed. Cheltenham : Elgar, 2001. Vol. 3. Р. 32-58.
Shiomi H., Wada K. Fordism Transformed: the development of production methods in the automobile industry. Oxford University Press, 1996. Р. 28-48.
Post-Fordism: A Reader / ed. by Ash Amin. Wiley-Blackwell, 1994.
Bonefeld W., Holloway J. Post-Fordism & social form. London : MacMillan, 1991. 218 p.
Williams K., Haslam C., Williams J. Ford versus "Fordism": the beginning of mass production? // Work, Employment & Society. 1992. Vol. 6, № 4. Р. 517-555.
Cohen Y. The Soviet Fordson. Between the politics of Stalin and the philosophy of Ford, 1924-1932 // Ford: The European History.. Vol. 2. P. 531-550.
Sutton A. Western Technology and Soviet Economic Development, 1930 to 1945. Stanford, 1971. 401 р.
Лавров Н.С. Основы организации труда и производства. Л. : Изд-во Ленингр. губпрофсовета, 1926. 222 с.
Шпотов Б.М. Генри Форд: жизнь и бизнес. М. : КДУ, 2005. 384 с.
Шпотов Б.М. Американский бизнес и Советский Союз, 1920-1930-е годы: лабиринты экономического сотрудничества. М. : ЛИБРОКОМ, 2013. 320 с.
Шпотов Б.М. Бизнесмены и бюрократы: американская техническая помощь в строительстве Нижегородского автозавода, 1929-1931 гг. // Экономическая история : ежегодник. 2002. М. : РОССПЭН, 2003. С. 191-232.
Симонов Н.С. Военно-промышленный комплекс СССР в 1920-1950-е гг. М. : РОССПЭН, 1996. 336 с.
Супоницкая И.М. Американизация советской России в 1920-1930-е гг. // Вопросы истории. 2013. № 9. C. 46-59.
Запарий В.В. Танковая промышленность Урала в 1940-е годы. Екатеринбург : УМЦ-УПИ, 2015. 219 с.
Форд Г. Моя жизнь, мои достижения. М. : АСТ, 2013. 270 с.
Российский государственный архив социально-политической истории (далее - РГАСПИ). Ф. 17. Оп. 3. Д. 1042. Л. 19.
Музей УВЗ, рукопись «История танкостроения на УТЗ № 183 им. Сталина. Т. 2. Кн. 1: Танковая промышленность».
Объединенный государственный архив Челябинской области. Ф. Р-792. Оп. 1. Д. 36. Л. 21-31.
РГАСПИ. Ф. 644. Оп. 1. Д. 129. Л. 2-9.
Российский государственный архив экономики (далее - РГАЭ). Ф. 8752. Оп. 7. Д. 121. Л. 3.
ГАСО. Ф. Р-262. Оп. 1. Д. 36. Л. 1061-1062.
РГАЭ. Ф. 8752. Оп. 4. Д. 360. Л. 34.
РГАЭ. Ф. 8752. Оп. 4. Д. 17. Л. 124.
РГАЭ. Ф. 8752. Оп. 4. Д. 40. Л. 2.
РГАСПИ. Ф. 82. Оп. 2. Д. 575. Л. 12.
 Elements of

Elements of "Fordism" policy as a tool of anticrisis management in the Urals tank industry in the period of the Great Patriotic War | Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta – Tomsk State University Journal. 2017. № 425. DOI: 10.17223/15617793/425/17

Download full-text version
Counter downloads: 1421