Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website: https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 03 February 2011
The purpose of this paper is to describe briefly the administrative organization and planning system of the typical large Soviet steel plant, and then show how the plant director carries out one of his essential functions both with the help of and in spite of the institutional framework within which he has to operate. Our attention will be focused primarily at the level of the individual firm, but in order to appreciate the problems of firm management we must first see how the individual enterprise fits into the all-pervading Soviet industrial bureaucracy.
1 Arakelian, A., Industrial Management in the USSR, trans. Raymond, E. A. (Washington: Public Affairs Press, 1950), p. 122Google Scholar.
2 Those interested in a long, detailed, and informative discussion are referred to a recent book on the subject: Riabinʼkii, B. Ia., Planirovanic Proizvoditva na Metallurgicheskom Zavoda (Planning Production in Iron and Steel Works), (Moscow, 1950)Google Scholar. The description is based on it.
3 Business Cycles (New York, 1939), pp. 86–87Google Scholar.
4 Granick, David, “Plant Management in the Soviet Industrial System” (Ph.D. Thesis, Columbia University, 1951), p. 9Google Scholar. On the organization of technical and scientific research in Soviet metallurgy see Clark, M. G., “Economics of Soviet Steel” (to be published by Harvard University Press in the spring of 1953), chap. iiiGoogle Scholar.
5 Pravda, August 10, 1951.
6 Stal', 1947, No. 3, p. 196, No. 8, pp. 690–701, 1948, No. 1, p. 20, No. 8, pp. 683–91, and No. 10, p. 867; Pravda, October 4, 1949; Trud, January 31, 1952.
7 Clark, “Economics of Soviet Steel,” chap. v.
8 G. I. Nosov, “Magnitogorsk Metallurgical Combine Named after Stalin,” Stal', 1947, No. 11, pp. 1045–50; also p. 969, and Trud, September 30, 1945.
9 Clark, op. cit., chap. xiii.
10 On Soviet adoption of high pressure see: Bardin, and Bannyi, , Chernaia Metallurgiia v Novoi Piatiletke (Moscow, 1947), p. 81Google Scholar; N. I. Krasavtsev, “Operation of Blast Furnaces Under High Pressure,”in section on foreign metallurgical news, Stal'1948, No. 6, pp. 561–63; Stal', 1947, No. 2, p. 191, No. 3, p. 180, No. 5, p. 477, 1948, No. 9, pp. 775–87. No. 10, pp. 946–49, No. 12, p. 1142; Izvestia, September 8, 1949; Pravda, January 31, February 11, March 34, May 11, December 27, 1951, January 5, 31, 1952; Trud, March 4, August 10, September 27, October 29, 1950, January 31, February 16, 21, March 2, April 1, 5, 6, 8, 21, 1951.
11 Pravda, November 4, 1949.
12 Schchelokov, M., “A Soviet Plant Director,” USSR Information Bulletin, September 7, 1951. P. 519Google Scholar. Ilʼin, G. M., “The Hammer and Sickle Works,” Stal', 1947, No. 11, pp. 1051–54Google Scholar. See also Granick, “Plant Management,” p. 62.
13 On the adoption of oxygen in open hearths, see also Bardin and Bannyi, Chemaia Metallurgiia, p. 157; Plan. Khoz., 1951, No. 6, p. 23; Stal', 1947, No. 9, pp. 807–14, 1948, No. 6, p. 574; Pravda, January 5, 1952; Trud, April 9, 1949.
14 On the number of Stalin prizes, see USSR Information Bulletin, February n, 1952, p. 68, and Pravda, December 26, 1949.
