The Column - December 2007 - (Page 8)

Zosimus The Column www.thecolumn.eu.com December 2007 Labouring the Point Zosimus wonders if streamlining workloads can help innovation in separation science. Three years ago I started an experiment. I now I have the results but I don’t think I could ever get them published, or at least I hope they would not be published, as n 1 and I always turn down papers when n 3. I started this experiment, or more this observation, after visiting the Port Sunlight Heritage Centre. The majority of wall space at the centre is devoted to William Hesketh Lever who, I believe, was a revolutionary for his time. Lever believed his best asset was his workforce and did everything he could to look after them. He claimed Port Sunlight was an exercise in “profit sharing”, but rather than share profits with the workers directly, he invested these in their village. He said: “It would not do you much good if you send it down your throats in the form of bottles of whisky, bags of sweets or fat geese at Christmas. On the other hand, if you leave the money with me, I shall use it to provide for you everything that makes life pleasant — viz nice houses, comfortable homes and healthy recreation.” He introduced many schemes for the welfare, education and entertainment of his workers. A cottage hospital was built in 1907, which continued until the introduction of the National Health Service in 1948. Lever also encouraged games, recreation and organizations that promoted art, literature, science or music. Many clubs and societies flourished in the village, such as The Boys’ Brigade, the amateur dramatics group the Port Sunlight Players as well as many sports clubs. But, one of his most innovative schemes involved the working day. At a time when the normal working day was in the order of ten hours or more, Lever reduced this to eight hours. In fact, it is reported he wanted to reduce working day to six hours but many thought this was a step too far. His arguments were simple, people were just too tired to work for 10 hours, they would be at work for 10 hours but did not work that amount of time. Reducing the working day increased workers’ productivity, reduced absenteeism and generally improved the health of the workforce. Author: Zosimus E-mail: zosimus@thecolumn.eu.com At the time I visited the centre I had two new PhD students starting their research program. After the first month in the laboratory I realised one student worked long hours as he would always be in the laboratory by 8am and never seemed to leave until after 8pm. And the other? Well I was lucky to see him before noon and I never saw him after 6pm. Normally I would have had words with this student, but I thought I would go along with the Lever principle of allowing this short day and compare the results from both students at the end of the first year. The first year report was presented well on time by the short time student and just in time by the long time student. In terms of presentation both were much the same, but in terms of content the short time student well outweighed that of the long-term students. Moving into the second year I could start to see a real difference between the work of the two students. The short time student was coming up with new ideas, but the long time student was going through a very structured work program. The gap continued to develop, with the short time student producing two papers and developing real innovative ideas. So today the short time student is well on his way to finishing his writing, while the long time student is only just starting on his. I bring this up, not only just to get my observations published, but because I have just reviewed another paper on a C18 bonding onto silica. There was absolutely nothing new in this paper. But the author must have worked for hours on the project doing repeat bonding after repeat bonding. I use the C18 bonding as an example I read to many papers and articles that are just repeats of other work or very small enhancements. If we are to move forward in separation science we must be innovative. May be we drop back to some basics and look at the way we work. So let’s start the process by being innovative in our working practices, just as Hesketh Lever was and then maybe we will also be innovative in our research. For more information on the Port Sunlight Heritage Centre visit http://www.portsunlightvillage.com/ 8 http://www.thecolumn.eu.com http://www.portsunlightvillage.com/

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of The Column - December 2007

The Column - December 2007
Contents
News
Zosimus
High Maintenance
Rapid Column Characterization using Complex Samples and Automated LC–MS Data Analysis
Trace Analysis of Perchlorate: Analytical Method and Removal Efficiency of Purification Technologies
Tips & Tricks: GPC/SEC

The Column - December 2007