Why did Charles F. Kettering, director of research at General Motors for many decades, sometimes reprimand engineers?

Question

BlackTom AI · Accepted Answer

To address the question, I will examine each answer option in turn and discuss why it could be considered or not considered plausible, given common themes in engineering leadership and management, while noting that the prompt does not supply a definitive correct choice.
Option 1: "for giving up too easily on difficult problems". This suggests reprimanding engineers for lack of perseverance. In engineering leadership, perseverance is valued, but reprimanding for giving up on difficult problems would imply an intolerance of struggle or trial-and-error. Depending on Kettering’s management style, he might instead emphasize persistence and iterative problem-solving. However, without a direct quote or context tying him specifically to reproving reluctance to tackle hard problems, this option remains an uncertain fit.
Option 2: "for allowing their emotions to influence their thinking processs". This option argues that engineers were reprimanded for emotional interference in rational analysis. In a research and development environment, letting emotions drive decisions is generally discouraged because it can bias judgments. If Kettering emphasized objective analysis and rigorous engineering judgment, this could be a plausible rationale for reprimand. The misspelling in the option ("processs") is likely a distractor, but the core idea—emotional influence on thinking—could be seen as a valid reason to admonish an engineer in a technical leadership context.
Option 3: "for focusing too much on calculations and not enough on \"what it feels like to be a piston in an engine\"." This phrase contrasts hard quantitative analysis with a qualitative, experiential feel for what the machine does. Reprimanding for focusing too much on calculations would be counterintuitive if the environment prizes rigorous analysis; however, if the culture over-valorized intuitive, experiential insight without sufficient modeling, one might critique excessive detachment from real-world operation. The quoted clause could reflect a critique of underappreciating the practical, user-facing or system-level intuition, rather than strict numerical methods. This option presents a possible tension between theory and experiential understanding, but it’s a somewhat unusual phrasing for a rebuke—so its plausibility hinges on the specific anecdote or philosophy attributed to Kettering.
Option 4: "for focusing on \"what it feels like to be a piston in an engine\", and not enough on calculations". This flips Option 3 and argues the reprimand was for overemphasizing qualitative feel at the expense of calculations. If Kettering prioritized empirical data, performance metrics, and calculational rigor to drive design decisions, this could be a believable rationale for a reprimand. It aligns with a classical engineering emphasis on quantitative reasoning and verifiable results, and it contrasts with mythologizing the machine’s experience. As with Option 3, the exact context is necessary to confirm, but this option presents a credible critique from a traditional engineering leadership perspective.
In summary, each option presents a different potential justification, but without the source material or the correct answer indicated, we cannot definitively identify which one Kettering actually used. The core ambiguity lies in whether his reprimands were aimed at emotion, at misbalanced emphasis between calculation and intuition, or at perseverance itself. The misspelling in Option 2 and the unusual phrasing in Options 3 and 4 suggest the item is testing recognition of a particular anecdote, yet the prompt does not provide that anecdote for verification.
If you have access to the source material or a key, align the reasoning with the quoted rationale to select the precise option. Otherwise, weigh which of these explanations best fits Kettering’s known engineering leadership philosophy—emphasis on rigorous, data-driven design, and possibly a warning against letting nontechnical factors override sound engineering judgment.

Sp25 HUMI D001H 51Z, 51Z, 55Z, 55Z Creative Minds-Honors Reading Quiz - Ch. 10: Empathizing

Why did Charles F. Kettering, director of research at General Motors for many decades, sometimes reprimand engineers?

View Explanation

Log in for full answers

Similar Questions

In a consumer society, many adults channel creativity into buying things

Economic stress and unpredictable times have resulted in a booming industry for self-help products

People born without creativity never can develop it

A product has a selling price of $20, a contribution margin ratio of 40% and fixed cost of $120,000. To make a profit of $30,000. The number of units that must be sold is: Type the number without $ and a comma. Eg: 20000

Which of the following statement regarding cost is correct:

Under the assumptions used in cost-volume-profit analysis, as the activity increases:

The CVP and break-even analysis are supported by a range of important assumptions. Which of the following is not an assumption of the CVP:

The break-even point is that at which:

More Practical Tools for Students Powered by AI Study Helper

Homework AI Solver

Stylized AI Paper Writer

Plagiarism Checker Assistant

Citation AI Academic Writing Tool

In-Class Translation Assistant

AI Note Generator

AI Quiz Answers

Past Exam Questions from University Test Bank

Smart Practice Assistant

Adaptive Practice

Making Your Study Simpler