Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page R7
Acknowledgments This report was made possible by the work of a great many people. I should like to record here my indebtedness to some of them. The Panel held eight meetings, all of which were well attended. In addition, most members of the Panel drafted chapters of the report or wrote papers that are included in this volume. All of them participated actively in Panel deliberations and helped to form the report through their detailed comments and suggestions. Nevertheless, as noted in Chapter 1, not every member of the Panel necessarily agrees with everything in the report. The Panel also benefited from the contribution of William E. Bittle, of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, who participated in the Panel deliberations when Reginald Newell was unable to attend and assisted in the review of written materials. The Panel relied heavily on its able and hardworking stab: Dave M. O'Neill, staff director; Sharon De Sha, stab officer; John W. Kendrick, consultant; and Gloria A. Wise, secretary. In addition to such routine tasks as arranging meetings, preparing minutes, and collecting source materials, members of the staff drafted several chapters of the report and contributed substantially to all of them. An important support role was played by other members of the staff and committees of the National Research Council. Among these I should like to mention particularly Margaret E. Martin, who attended many meetings of the Panel and whose broad knowledge of official statistics was of great help. Eugenia Grohman and Christine L. McShane provided us with . . vat
OCR for page R7
V111 Acknowledgments valuable editorial assistance. Special recognition should be given to the unique role of William Kruskal, who was chairman of the Committee on National Statistics when we began our work. Throughout our efforts, Dean Kruskal has made incisive comments, repeatedly calling into question concepts that economists too easily take for granted. He has thus acted as the conscience of the Panel. That we have not succeeded in answering many of his questions is not his fault. Our meetings were attended by a number of observers from the statistical agencies of the federal government, who participated in our discussions and often provided much-needed information and saved us from serious error. Several of these observers also read drafts of chapters and commented on them. Although I cannot list all of these observers here, I should like to mention particularly the valuable inputs of Jerome Mark and his staff of the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of Labor and Martin Marimont and his staff of the Bureau of Economic Analysis of the U.S. Department of Commerce. This volume contains a number of papers by members and staff of the Panel, outside consultants, and members of the staffs of federal statistical agencies. We have drawn on these extensively in preparing our report. The version of the paper by John G. Myers and Leonard Nakamura that appears here is substantially shorter than their original thorough study. The full paper is available from the National Technical Information Service. A draft of this report was reviewed by three sets of reviewers: the Committee on National Statistics and the Assembly of Behavioral and Social Sciences of the National Research Council and the Report Review Committee of the National Academy of Sciences. We are grateful to these reviewers for the great care they have taken in reviewing the draft and for their many valuable suggestions. Finally, I should like to thank the agency that funded our work, the National Center for Productivity and Quality of Working Life. This study would not have been possible without its active support. The National Center recognized the importance of the subject and initiated discussions with the Committee on National Statistics, which created our panel. The Center's executive director, George Kuper, and its staff gave us help throughout our work. In particular, Edgar Weinberg participated actively in formulating the study and provided continuing intellectual and administrative support. Although the National Center no longer exists, its functions are being carried out elsewhere in the federal government. ALBERT REES, Chairman Panel to Review Productivity Statistics