General Brehon B. Somervell and the Revival ofKoppers Company

byJohn K.Ohl

THEENDof World War II,the Koppers vast Mellon empire, decided to clean up the Koppers mishmash. Co. was widelyconsidered tobe the "dog"of Spurred by poor earnings from the public utilities and the obvious the -based empire. need to bring order to the corporate structure, he had the Born inthe early years of the century, the company reorganized in1944. Also, incompliance with a Securi- company was known best formanufacturing ties and Exchange Commission finding that Koppers' control of a by- product coke oven designed by Heinrich Eastern Gas and Fuel violated the Public Utilities Holding Koppers.ATThe by-product ovens made possible recovery of valuable Company Act,plans were developed to sell Eastern Gas and Fuel, chemicals that previously were lost up the chimney ofthe old- whichhad the effect of takingKoppers out of the utilitybusiness fashioned beehive coke oven. By the 1920s, the Mellon family and and almost everything that went withit,such as the coal mining a few of their intimates controlled Koppers, and under the leader- and railroad operations. Other elements were consolidated into ship of Henry B.Rust, president from 1915 until 1933, the firm one company centered on 14 divisions.2 experienced spectacular growth. Rust then expanded into soft-coal The 1944 reorganization gave ailingKoppers the form of mining,construction and operation of artificial gas and by-product corporate unification. Butfor itto be translated into substance, coke plants, ownership of a steel company and blast furnaces, Koppers needed fresh leadership. J. P. Tierney, who had run the refining crude tar, wood preserving, manufacturing piston rings, company since Rust's retirement and had brought itthrough the and effective control of the VirginianRailroad and also Eastern Depression, died in1944, and Mellon saw no effective replace- Gas and Fuel Associates, a public-utility holding company. During ment among the existing executives. Mellon concluded that World War II,the company got into stillanother field when itbuilt Koppers needed someone outside of the Rust past topullit and operated a large plant for the government at Kobuta, Pa., to together. After a thorough search, he judged that Gen. Brehon B. manufacture styrene and for the synthetic rubber Somervell, recently retired from the Armyafter serving as head of program. the ArmyService Forces (ASF), had the planning, organizing, and While spectacular, the growth had brought problems. There administrative expertise to do the job.Named president of were more than 150 companies in the Koppers "family,"and each Koppers in1946 and later chairman of the board, Somervell ran operated, forall practical purposes, autonomously. No "two ever Koppers until 1955. Under his leadership, Koppers emerged as a pulled together," even though almost all were in one way or "new" company and, at least for a time, fulfilleditspromise like another related to coal. Inaddition, company executives seemed such Mellongiants as Aluminum Company of America and Gulf more interested in "making money by trading securities and OilCorp. dominating sources of supply and markets than by broadening the profitbase at...the level of the lump of coal." Perhaps for this The Precedent for a Somervell reason, they overlooked the organic chemical industry, a great decision to look to a retired military man for growth business which derived many of its raw materials from the executive leadership was nothing new inAmerican gas and tar from the coke ovens. Koppers always made money, Mellon'sbusiness. For years, companies had employed former even during the Depression, but most of its earnings and large professional soldiers because of their prestige, initiative, aggres- amounts ofMellon credit were required for the never-ending task siveness, managerial talents, and technical skills. After the Civil ofrounding out itsholdings. l War, scores of ex-generals engaged insignificant business careers; During World War II,Richard K.Mellon,the overseer of the generals George McClellan and P.G.T. Beauregard, for example, became railroad presidents, while Joseph and Simon K.Ohl teaches history at Mesa Community College inMesa, Az. A native of the Pittsburgh area E.Johnston John B. insurance agencies. In who received his doctorate in American history from the University of Cincinnati, Ohlis the author of Buckner headed large regional the several articles and books, including Supplying theTroops: General Somervell and American Logistics in twentieth century, thousands of generals and admirals found WWII(1994). employment inbusiness. Asignificant percentage of these

78 Pittsburgh History, Summer 1995 Gen. Brehon Somervell, who left the military after ' I World War IIto lead the Pittsburgh- based Koppers Co., is generally credited J withrestoring the company to profitability in the 1950s. This public relations photo pairs Somervell witha model of the by- product coke oven developed by Koppers' founder. recently, William G. Pagonis, who directed the Army's logistical effort for Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm, was hired by Sears, Roebuck and Co. to keep its department stores stocked and home deliveries flowing smoothly. 3 Somervell represents the latter type of military-businessman. Commissioned inthe Corps of Engineers after his graduation from West Point in1914, he went to France shortly after the United States entered World War I. There he built ammunition dumps, depots, and barracks, and served as a staff officer inthe Banker Richard Mellon made 89th Divisioninthe latter phase of the Meuse-Argonne offensive. the decisions that brought During the 1920s and 1930s, Somervell was deeply involved inthe Somervell, a military supply rivers and harbors work of the Corps of Engineers and, beginning and logistics director, to Mellon in 1936, he directed the sprawling Works Progress Administration Bank-controlled Koppers. program inNew York City.During a four-year period, he trans- formed the program, plagued by boondoggles, internal bickering, and conflicts withcity officials and labor leaders, into a model workreliefprogram that served the community well. In1940-41, Somervell, as chief of the Army's Construction Division,helped prepare the nation for war by building training camps and muni- tions plants. Impressed by Somervell's accomplishments and drive, War Department Chief ofStaff General George C. Marshall in 1942 named him head of the ASF, a newly created command responsible for the supply and administration of the Army within the United States and the support of troops overseas. For all practical purposes, Somervell became the Army's principal logistician. 4 Marked by tremendous ambition, tireless energy, and manage- rialbrilliance, Somervell was a formidable figure who reveled in " big tasks and was "enough of an S.O.B. to get them done. Soldiers, from privates to generals, who let him down over the years were subjected to his wrath, and the wise subordinate quickly learned, as engineer John Hardin remembered, that "you officers, particularly after 1945, established new careers in arms- were going topay a heavy penalty ifyou didn't give him what he contracting industries. There they have often made effective use of wanted." Somervell, he added, would "chop people's heads off the technical specialization they secured while inuniform, or at without givingthem any explanation at all."5 Through force of least used their knowledge of how the Pentagon does business. personality, shrewd accumulation of power, and sheer ability, Manymilitary leaders, however, have been employed by Somervell carved out a dominant role for himself in the procure- business inthe post-World War IIperiod because of reasons that ment, supply, and movement of materiel forces during World War have nothing to do withtechnical specialization orknowledge of II.Speaking years later, Marshall left no doubt about the value of Pentagon red tape. Rather, through their military experiences, they Somervell's work. "He was one of the most efficient officers Ihave became first-rate managers. Since first donning their uniforms, ever seen," Marshall stated. He "got things done inCalcutta as fast they were developing leadership skilland ability to organize and as he did inthe meadows around the Pentagon. ...IfIwent into administer. They could define objectives indirect and concise control inanother war,Iwould start looking for another General terms, and, as illustrated by their military accomplishments, get Somervell the very first thing Idid."6 results. These attributes made them good candidates for top executives inmajor corporations, including many civilian business MilitaryTraining for Business establishments. Lucius D.Clay, the ASF's top procurement officer assessing the value of his military training for his later from 1942 to 1944 and later commanding general of American business career, Somervell's most important wartime experi- forces inoccupied Germany, is an especially prominent example of Inences dealt withreform of the War Department supply this type of military-businessman. As chairman of theboard and organization. On the eve of World War II,the department supply chief executive officer of Continental Can Co. from 1950 to 1962, organization consisted of a series ofsemiautonomous bureaus he converted the firm, longa distant second initsindustry, into the responsible for ordnance supplies, quartermaster supplies, and the nation's biggest packaging company through reorganization ofits like;each operated separate systems for purchase, finance, storage, executive structure and diversification of its activities. More and distribution. There was no direct command authority over the

80 Pittsburgh History, Summer 1995 Gen. George C. Marshall, left, and Somervell at the Quebec Conference, September 1944.

81 The Revival of Koppers Somervell, left, with Lt. Gen. Jacob Devers and Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower, right, France, January 1945.

82 Pittsburgh History, Summer 1995 bureaus and no machinery for close coordination of the entire Somervell's wartime efforts brought himmany accolades and logistics level below the secretary of war himself. Delays on vital rapid promotion fromlieutenant colonel to four-star general. But, decisions and confusion incarrying out War Department plans by the time the warended inthe summer of 1945, he had decided resulted. Inearly 1942, Marshall reorganized the department to to leave the Armyas soon as possible. Somervell never formally substitute the vertical pattern of military command for the stated his reasons for retiring from the Army; however, itwould established pattern of bureaucratic coordination. Under the appear that several factors influenced his decision. Examining his Marshall reorganization, the supply and administrative services prospects inthe postwar Army,itseems apparent that Somervell were grouped into the ASF, which made the supply bureaus part of found littlethat was appealing. He had no desire to continue inhis a unified command. present assignment, for his enemies inthe Army and inCongress Aparticipant inthe Marshall reorganization, Somervell was a were already sharpening their knives to cut his command and strong believer inthe necessity for a unified logistics command. organization intopieces. Any other assignment would ineffect be Once given the command of the ASF, he set out tobring greater a demotion, be unbearably routine, and probably place himunder efficiency to military supply. Through a variety of prewar assign- officers who had held assignments during the war of lesser ments, he had already devised a managerial system so he could importance than his. Somervell was also anxious to try something know what his organization was doing and act quickly to correct else and, at the same time, to improve his personal finances. Both deficiencies. Itincluded a control division, operating out of his considerations prompted him to look at private business. 10 own office, to check results and toplan and implement organiza- tional changes, a program for action projected as far into the The Move to Koppers future as possible, extensive use of statistics, a determination to cut retirement set for April30, 1946, Somervell began a red tape, strict accountability for subordinates, and an unrelenting 120-day terminal leave at the end of December 1945 and drive for efficiency on the part of every member of his team. With Hisimmediately took up residence at Ocala, Fla., where he littleregard for the sensibilities of the bureaus, Somervell tried to sifted through a number of business opportunities. The most impose his control over the bureaus, and eventually he attempted intriguing was an offer from Koppers. Only days after Somervell to eliminate the traditional bureau system by creating a new had arrived inFlorida, Frank R. Denton, vice president and chief logistics edifice based on complete unity of command and func- executive ofMellon National Bank and Trust Co., had visitedhim tional lines of operation. Only inthis way,he later told a War at Richard Mellon's behest to discuss the presidency of Koppers. Department board looking into the Army's wartime organization- Denton, who had served under Somervell inthe ASF as deputy alproblems, could he eliminate the overlapping functions and director of the production division, and Mellon,another ASF large operating staffs inherent inthe traditional system, which he alumnus, believed that Somervell was a "scorcher" as a manager feltbred inefficiency 7 and just the man to tackle Koppers' particular difficulties. Denton In the minds of many observers and his superiors, Somervell brought withhim a 147-page prospectus outlining the direction brought greater effectiveness to War Department supply opera- they wanted the company to take, and after reviewing itthorough- tions. But inthe process, he encountered strong resistance from ly and traveling to Pittsburgh to discuss the position personally the bureau chiefs, who saw him as an unabashed empire-builder withMellon,Somervell inMarch 1946 accepted the offer to and were determined to protect their turfs. For example, they become the company's president at an annual salary of $75,000. n regarded the organizational experts from his control division as Koppers had only 14,000 employees and approximately 60 meddlesome busybodies who lacked practical knowledge of the facilities, so running it,Somervell reasoned, could hardly be any real problems and steadfastly opposed many of the changes in more difficultthan supplying an army fighting a global war. Tohis organization and procedures they advocated. Chief of Ordnance wayof thinking, the Armyand business were very much alike Maj. Gen. LevinH.Campbell later recalled: "Somervell had a large except that the test inbusiness was more immediate, namely how number of what we used to call parachute jumpers who had much money the company made the last year. Somervell was also nothing in the world to do except criticize. While most of them certain that he would succeed because his Army experience had had little or no experience orless ability,Iwillconcede that they exposed him to many business and financial problems. Moreover, did a top-notch jobof criticizing....Frankly, knowing of the as Denton and Mellon made clear, Koppers needed centralized background of many. ..[ASF] men, none of their criticismcould be direction above allelse, and Somervell was confident that the taken seriously, and Irecall at the time we certainly didnot." 8 control system he had developed and implemented in the Army Ultimately, the bureaus defeated Somerveirs efforts tobring would bring order out of the chaos at Koppers. Finally, Mellon had permanent centralized control over them, and in1946 the ASF was promised Somervell practically a free hand. abolished and the bureau chiefs were vested witheffective control Somervell took overat Koppers onMay 1, 1946, and spent the over the Army's supply activities. Reflecting on this development next twomonths sizing up the company's operations and touring and the controversial character of Somervell's leadership of the its scattered plants and district offices. 12 Despite the 1944 restruc- ASF,Marshall told an interviewer that "allthe [postwar] reorgani- turing pushed through after J.P. Tierney's death, littlehad zation as far as supply and the services were concerned was built changed. The operating divisions, as Fletcher Byrom, a future on avoiding any future development of a man like General president and chairman ofKoppers, remembered, were function- Somervell."9 ingas "feudal kingdoms" inthe same manner as they had when

83 The Revival of Koppers they were separate operating companies. Each had its own sales programs covering their projected activities and expenses. These office,production department, and research facility (ifany), and forecasts, taken together, constituted the Koppers corporate they were only loosely tied together by central staff departments program. such as accounting and law. Douglas Grymes, then sales manager Its development involved considerable tug and pullbetween for the wood preserving division,recalled that there was no Walker and the division heads. Somervell insisted on demanding "across the board" company policy, and vice presidents often did goals, while the division heads were waryof specific goals, not talk to each other. Even withina division, there was no unity, especially profits, against which their performance could be and thus several sales offices would sometimes submit bids to measured. Somervell later remarked about the "innate conserva- provide materials for the same contract. At the company's head- tismof the average businessman;" he will"hithis sales quarters inPittsburgh, the president's office had so littlestaff that estimates... within 10 percent but onprofits the tendency is for a Somervell "had to do his own figuring withhis ownpencil."13 man to discount his own estimates by anything from 10 to 25 InJuly 1946, Somervell moved to change all that. Building on percent, depending onhis nature. After all,nobody likes to be the start already taken in1944, he proposed that Koppers be asked whyhe didn't make his goal." 17 Somervell would indicate to restructured around eight operating divisions and eight staff Walker what he considered realistic figures based onhistorical departments. He also drew up a statement of objectives along with results, forecasts of the general trend ofbusiness, and other factors. a program for accomplishing them. Led by Stanley Brown, head of Walker then negotiated a program witha division head, and the finance department and one who had aspired to the presidency Somervell reviewed it.Few programs were renegotiated. of the company, several members of the board of directors op- posed Somervell's initiatives onthe grounds that he wanted to A Command Performance make too many changes too quickly. But Somervell had anticipat- monthly progress report was the measuring stick for ed this opposition and had prepared for itby having Mellon, who the program. About the 4thof each month, the divisions was not present at theJuly 29, 1946, board meeting when the Theand departments started sending detailed reports on sales, initiatives were discussed, provide him witha letter ofendorse- profits, investments, inventories, unfilled orders, and other matters ment. After Somervell read Mellon's letter, the board granted its for the previous month to the control section. Control looked approval and there was no longer any doubt that Somervell was in particularly at where a division had fallen short of its goals, orhad charge. 14 greatly exceeded them, and then, determined the reasons for the The most notable aspect of the Somervell organization was performance. Itput allpertinent information into a 100- to 150- the creation of the control section inhis office to perform the page report replete with tables, graphs, and charts. The core of the same function that the control division of the ASF had performed report was the detailed data for every division and, withineach for him. It would be his eyes and ears, furthering the unity and division, forevery plant and product for the month and the year to centralized control that Somervell believed was essential to the date. Goal figures for comparison and each manager's thoughts on company's long-term success. Tohead the control section, the outlook for the future were also included. On the third Somervell chose George M.Walker, a civilengineer who had Thursday of the month, the report was sent to Somervell and worked withthe construction division,the gas and coke division, about 130 company executives. Over the next several days, and the finance department, as well as at Kobuta. Walker recalled Somervell studied itthoroughly, generously dotting his copy with that he had only the "vaguest idea" of what Somervell had inmind questions writteninred inkbased on a briefing givenhimby when the twofirst talked about the jobina telephone conversa- Walker. tion. At their initial meeting, Somervell gave Walker a copy of a —On the followingTuesday, the company's operating —commit- progress report from the ASF to study and asked him to map out a tee Somervell and the division and department heads met. "pictorialidea" of what he thought Somervell expected. By the end Meetings began early, and could last wellinto the evening. Atall of the meeting, Somervell was sold on Walker, and he gave him an times Somervell was incharge. He went over the report ingreat office next tohis own. Walker picked four men tohelp him, and detail, praising good results and asking how? what? and why? on together they made up the control section. 15 below par performances. Somervell, Douglas Grymes recalled, Walker's first assignment was to develop and implement a could "make you squirm by looking right through you," and was reporting mechanism so that Somervell could have continual ready "torip you up one side and down the other" ifdispleased. 18 supervision of the company's entire organization. 16 Modelingit But by the end of the meeting, Somervell had "an accurate, after Somervell's wartime system, Walker had the reporting complete, up-to-date picture" ofpractically every company system operating withinmonths, and by 1948, itwas completely in activity, while every manager had been compelled to "face up place. Somervell would state the overall direction for the company, squarely to every detail" inhis operations and every problem he and the control section negotiated an annual program for each confronted. division against which monthly, quarterly, and yearly progress Somervell gave the control section other jobs as well.Shortly were measured. The program spelled out, among other things, after the section was created, Somervell told Walker to prepare an targets for sales and profits, inventory forecasts, and raw material organizational manual. Koppers never had a manual, and Somerv- and capital requirements. The staff departments also drew up ellbelieved that clean-cut lines ofauthority and areas of responsi-

84 Pittsburgh History, Summer 1995 bilitylikehe had known inthe military were essential. Walker completed the manual by the end of 1946 and revised itin1949. It spelled out jobdescriptions for every manager inthe company and limits of authority and responsibility. Walker's control section also drew up a procedural manual detailing how transactions should be handled, developed standard forms for the company, carried out special projects for Somervell, and kept constant watch over the company's activities to foresee organizational needs and bring them to Somervell's attention. Fletcher Byrom stated that Koppers' managers greeted the control section withskepticism, anxiety, and resentment. They complained that Walker wanted too much information that took too much time toprepare, and that control section employees tried to tell them what to do; certainly many did not like the section because "ithad the facts by which performance could be judged." 19 Gradually, Koppers' managers adapted to Somervell's notion of control. Inhis 17 years withKoppers, Walker had come toknow many of the managers, making iteasier to sell the system to them than ifhe had been an outsider. Moreover, the managers realized that they had no choice. Walker had the backing of Somervell ineverything he did, and Somervell had the backing of Mellon. Finally, it soon became apparent that the control section had achieved itspurpose. What previously had been separate operations were now being coordinated toprovide a solid founda- tionfor directed growth and improved profitperformance. The company, as Walter McCutcheon, a company official,later commented, was becoming more "alert" and capable of things it had not previously done. 20 The introduction of his management methods was the most important change that Somervell brought to Koppers inhis first years, but his presence was soon felt in other areas as well. When his appointment as president was announced, there was "consider- able clucking around Koppers and Pittsburgh." Before Somervell, as Douglas Grymes remembered, Koppers' management had pretty much been "an oldboys club." But Somervell was the first outsider to lead the company, and a hard-driving general to boot. George Walker recalled that "everybody was scared to death," fearing that Somervell would clean house or at least "lopoff a few heads" just to show he was the boss. YetSomervell knew, at least initially, that he largely had to make do withthe people at hand. 21 Nevertheless, Somervell placed his stamp on the top rungs of management early by bringing innew blood, often recruiting former ASF people for key posts. The most important was Fred C. Foy. In1948, Koppers, which had always been primarily an engineering and construction group and not particularly sales- oriented, was looking for a new head of the sales department, and Walker told Somervell that the company had no suitable person Koppers Building, downtown Pittsburgh, c. 1928 for the post. Somervell hired Foy, an advertising man before the war who had gone to Washington in 1942 and eventually had headed Somervell's purchase division. In 1948, he joined Koppers as sales director and immediately developed a more aggressive sales policy. Two years later, after Foy successfully coordinated the work of the company's divisional sales staffs, Somervell named himhead of the tar products division, to give him operating experience while grooming him as his successor. 22

85 The Revival of Koppers Inaddition to changes inpersonnel, Somervell instituted a and application research carried onby the divisions. Toward this plan forkey individuals that provided substantial salary increments end, he set up a central research laboratory at Verona, Pa., in1952. for those whose divisions earned more money than "what might Inaddition, in1949 he named G. Frank D'Alelio,a chemist with reasonably be expected under existingmarket conditions." Later, impressive credentials as an authority onplastics, head of the Somervell added stock options and "phantom stock" (an executive research department. Somervell's emphasis onresearch did not was assigned stock, but not ownership of it,and received dividends produce the results he had anticipated, however, largely because of and the increased value of the stock when he retired) toround out conflicts between D'Alelio and the divisions and the failure of the plan. Somervell also didnot lose sight of the importance of D'Alelio toprovide effective direction. Somervell was not usually getting the most from the company's hundreds of salaried employ- one to tolerate this level ofperformance. But D'Aleliohad been his ees. Ithad not been uncommon for an employee inone division to choice, and he stood by him.26 earn considerably more than one inanother division withcompa- Not surprisingly, considering his wartime role, Somervell rable responsibilites. Somervell was convinced that such inequities early on readied Koppers incase of another war.To avoid delays in hindered performance by sapping morale. Thus, he had every mobilization experienced inthe early days of World War II,he had salaried position inthe company evaluated to determine an a company mobilization plan prepared. Under it, the complete appropriate classification and then implemented a company- wide production capacity of each Koppers plant was inventoried, pay program based on a specified salary range for each classifica- estimates were made of the raw materials required for maximum tion.Salaries became based on a rational planand not the whimof production, and a survey was conducted to determine ifthere a superior. 23 were additional products that the company could manufacture ina Other changes were no less significant. Consolidated sales national emergency. On the basis of these findings, company offices were set up ina number of cities, and an annual sales planners drew up a listof plant allocations, tentative production meeting was instituted so that Somervell could inspire the troops schedules, and additional equipment that might be needed for war "on the battlefront" and have them work instep. The first was held output and thereafter reviewed the findings annually. Koppers was inPittsburgh onJanuary 23, 1947, and inhis customary manner one of the firstlarge corporations to draw up a complete mobiliza- Somervell challenged the salesmen and sales managers to "know tion plan, and inspeeches and articles, Somervell urged other your Company and itsproducts" and to do "a record-breaking companies to emulate Koppers. 27 sales jobinthe year ahead." Inhis words: "Our sales program for As the operating chief, Somervell pushed an aggressive 1947 calls for a 50 percent over-allincrease above the 1946 program ofdiversification and expansion. He particularly empha- figures....[and we] are confident that you can not only better the sized the chemical operations, regarding them as his "petproject." figures wehave set. We must reach them, and unless you have less During the war, the company's success inproducing butadiene and ability than Icredit you with,you willexceed some of them by styrene at Kobuta had convinced company officials that Koppers wide margins." 24 could have "a good future" inorganics after the war. By the time Early inhis tenure at Koppers, Somervell determined that he Somervell joined the company, the decision had been made to wanted no properties sitting idle.Ifa division had no specific plans move intochemicals on a large scale and Walker had already for an idle property, he ordered itsold. His gaze also fell on the negotiated the purchase of the styrene side of the plant from the company's Pittsburgh headquarters. Completed in1929, and one War Assets Administration, as wellas the lease of other portions of of the largest and most modern office buildings inthe city, the 33- the plant. Later, Koppers bought the butadiene side as welland story Koppers Building was yielding the company only a 2 percent acquired facilities to produce chemicals used in the manufacture of profit. Somervell, therefore, sold the building inearly 1948 to the resins, adhesives, and pharmaceuticals; chemicals used inthe Equitable LifeAssurance Society for $6 millionand then took back rubber industry and inlubricating oils, synthetic resins, and the Koppers office space through a 30-year lease. This action was disinfectants; hydrogen cyanide and sulfuric acid; ethylbenzene; fairlyinnovative for the time and gave Koppers a profit of and polythlene. These operations were the core of the newly $2,260,913. 25 formed chemical division. 28 Somervell also stepped up Koppers' commitment to research. Over the next fewyears, Somervell plowed much of the Previously, research had been carried on through the Mellon company's capital funds into the chemical operations. Initially, the Institute ofIndustrial Research inPittsburgh, fellowships at several division was notprofitable, but withinfive years, through aggres- universities, and laboratories incertain plants. But Somervell sive marketing and the development of anexpanding product line, considered these efforts insufficient. Moreover, he was convinced itwas second among the company's divisions in net profits. that the existing organization was not moving fast enough, even Koppers produced nearly 20 percent of the nation's styrene and 15 though he had greatly increased the funds earmarked for research. percent of the polystyrene, an important ingredient inplastics, and At one point,according to a story that Fletcher Byrom said made itwas the nation's leading producer of resorcinol. Somervell was the rounds at Koppers, he even got down on the floor and begged careful, however, not tobite off more than the company could the head of the research department for greater speed. handle. As a result, he passed up a lot of products likephenol Ultimately, Somervell favored a two-tiered effort consisting of plastics "inwhich the weight of volume or of competition" had long-term research carried onby a central research department beaten down the profit margin. While never a chemical company

Pittsburgh History, Summer 1995 on the scale ofDow, DuPont, or Monsanto, Koppers under Somer- vellcarved out a profitable for itself andbecame "a tidylittle chemical company." 29 The success of other divisions was mixed. The wood preserv- ing divisionhad always emphasized the sale of treated railway ties and utilitypoles. However, Somervell pushed itto go after the agricultural and industrial market for woodproducts such as fence posts, and throughout his tenure at Koppers the division held "a steady course" in sales and profits. The gas and coke, metal products, and tar products divisions, meanwhile, accounted for considerable sales volume, but were unspectacular inprofits. Finally, the engineering and construction division,the direct descendant of the original coke oven business of Koppers and the most mercurial divisionbecause of its dependence on industrial construction and heavy industry activity, emerged as the company leader in sales and profits. Byacquiring in1949 Freyn Engineering Corp. and Open Hearth Combustion Co., leaders inthe design and engineering ofblast furnaces, open hearth furnaces, and their auxiliaries, Koppers engineered and built whole steel mills instead of just coke ovens. The division also builtplants for the production of chemicals and gas utilities and other industrial structures. 30 Somervell closely followed developments withthe divisions, not only through the progress reports but also through frequent visits to company facilities. Already well-briefed about a facility's function by the control section, he would arrive exactly on time. Meticulously dressed and all-business, Somervell, Walter McCutch- eon remembered, always made "ahell of an impression." He would be armed withspecific questions, see everything, and never wander off the subject. Ifemployees were not tellinghim something he wanted to know, he was telling them something he wanted them to know.31 On several occasions, Somervell went abroad to look into the company's foreign operations, traveling to Britain, France, and Turkey inthe spring of 1950 and to Chile that fallfor opening ceremonies at a steel plant that Koppers built. Ingeneral, however, Somervell was skeptical about overseas ventures, expressing Somervell and his beloved concern to a friend about "the difficult national and racial relation- monthly progress report, a maintain, ships which wehave to and also with the difficulty of central plank in his system 32 handling Americans so far away fromhome." of centralized management at Koppers. A Koppers Comeback Meetings at which the the early 1950s, Koppers was a "new" company. As reports bymiddle ByMellon had anticipated, Somervell had brought order out management executives of chaos. What had been a host of different operations were delivered began early emerged as a company working toward a common goal. Clear-cut in the morning and lasted lines of authority and responsibility had been established, and a late into the evening. definite program ofgrowth had been instituted, with a comprehen- sive system for checking progress toward objectives. According to Burton Hersh, a student of the Mellon family, Mellon never attended a stockholders' meeting ofone of his companies unless he was dissatisfied withthe management. After 1946, he had no need to attend a stockholders' meeting at Koppers during the remaining years of the Somervell era. Recognizing Somervell's accomplish- ment, Mellon had him named chairman of the board inMarch 1950

87 The Revival of Koppers as wellas president and raised his annual salary to $125,000. operating divisions and brought them under central direction Somervell remained inthese positions untilhis death inFebruary through functional staff departments, of which the most important 1955. 33 was the control section inhis ownoffice. Along with the move Koppers' fortunes from the late 1950s through the late 1980s into chemicals, Somervell's reorganization of the management are beyond the scope of this article, but a brief overview willput setup and tight administrative line on the divisions converted Somerveirs accomplishments inperspective. By 1960, a downturn Koppers into a strong money-maker. Under Somervell, Koppers inconstruction associated withthe steel industry, a business which experienced a remarkable "comeback." 35 had accounted for about half of the company's sales, had reduced Somervell proved tobe the right man for Koppers at that profits dramatically. Profits also ebbed out of chemical and plastics particular time. Inthe late 1940s and early 1950s Koppers, as due to a series of price wars. As a result, Fred Foy,made chairman George Walker stated, needed someone who could make a of the board in1957, and Fletcher Byrom,president beginning in company out of its sprawling entities. Somervell's highly central- 1960, closed marginal plants, slashed employment, and abandoned ized, top-down management style fitthe need. He made the several products. Identifying and building on the company's divisions into a whole and made the company more efficient. In strengths was emphasized. In 1964, Koppers began a prolonged the words of Fletcher Byrom, Somervell served Koppers wellby upturn as a "leaner, tougher company." creating the "organizational foundation forgrowth." 36 @ Foy and Byrommoved away from Somervell's style of management. The company's needs after Somervell's death were different than a decade earlier. Foy and Byromemphasized people Notes 1 Fortune, where Somervell had emphasized organization. More outgoing "The Comeback ofKoppers," Jan. 1952, 69. For the history of Koppers, see "Koppers," Fortune, April1937, 67-74, 132, 136, and 139; Fred C. Foy, Ovens, Chemicals personable Somervell, out and than Foy threw many ofSomerv- and Men!: Koppers Company, Inc. (New York, 1958), 10-24;Burton Hersh, The Mellon ell's strict "military"policies. Byromreplaced Foy as chief operat- Family: AFortune inHistory (New York, 1978), 308-10; David E. Koskoff, The Mellons: The ingofficer in1967, and while ready to admit that Somervell's "hard Chronicle ofAmerica's Richest Family (New York, 1978), 120-2 and 300-1; Richard P. and fast rules" might once have been necessary, he was convinced Windisch, "Koppers Co.," Barron's, Sept. 12, 1955, 17, 19, and 21-2. 2 Koppers News, March-April1945; New York Times, Oct. 10 and 30, 1944, May 16 and 31, that over the years they had undermined the initiativeand imagi- and June 28, 1945; Moody's Manual ofInvestments, 1946 (New York, 1946), 2147-54; nation essential to successful business leadership. Thus, Byrom Commercial and Financial Chronicle, May 26, 1947; "Comeback ofKoppers," 69-70. transformed management at Koppers into the antithesis of what it 3 Paul Thompson Armitstead, "Retired MilitaryLeaders in American Business," Ph.D. had been under Somervell. Byromencouraged subordinates "to dissertation (Univ.of Texas, 1967), 1-3, 25-29, 64-67, 118-121, 136, and 242-273; "Brass Hats inIndustry: Business Tries Reverse Recruiting," Business Week, Aug. 9, 1952, 30-1; take on as much responsibility" as they thought they could handle. "The MilitaryBusinessmen," Fortune, Sept. 1952, 128-130, 132, 134, and 136; "Ringing They, inturn, were encouraged to delegate authority to their the Brass," Time,June 29, 1959, 73-74 and 76;New York Times, Sept. 21, 1993. subordinates, and on down the line.Somervell's control section 4 For a detailed examination of Somervell's military career, see John Kennedy Ohl, disappeared, and about all that remained from Somervell's era was Supplying the Troops: General Somervell and American Logistics inWWII(DeKalb, II.,1994). 5 Interview withJohn Hardin, Engineers Historical File, U.S. Army Corps ofEngineers programming Byrom a the reporting and system, which used in Historical Office, Fort Belvoir, Va. more "informational fashion" instead of for direct contol. Koppers 6 Larry Bland, ed., George C. Marshall: Interviews and Reminiscences forForrest Pogue grew fast inthe 1970s under Byrom,recovered from a nosedive a (Lexington, Va., 1991), 445. 7 decade later under a new chairman, Charles Pullin,but then Reorganization ofthe War Department: Interview with General Brehon B. Somervell, Commanding General, ASF,Patch Board Files, U.S. Army Center of MilitaryHistory, became the target of a hostile takeover in1987. Britishhomebuild- Washington, D.C. er Brian C. Beazer acquired control of Koppers inJune 1988, sold 8 L.H. Campbell to H.C. Thomson, July 15 and Sept. 17, 1949, Campbell Papers, U.S. many divisions, and reorganized what was leftunder a new name. Army MilitaryHistory Institute, Carlisle Barracks, Pa. 9 Bland, After decades of fluctuating fortunes, Koppers ceased to exist.34 George C. Marshall, 626. 10 Interview withMr.and Mrs. E. Macdonald Matter, Dec. 28, 1987, Pittsburgh. Areview tenure, 1946 1955, of Somervell's nine-year from to 11 New York Times, Mar. 18, 1946; interview with Mr.and Mrs. E. Macdonald Matter, finds that Koppers' sales and profits rose dramatically. From $112 Aug.15, 1988, Pittsburgh; Minutes of Board ofDirectors Meeting of Koppers Co., Inc., million in1946, sales climbed to $285 millionby 1951, and profits March 25, 1946, Beazer East Inc. Records, Pittsburgh (hereafter, such documents to minutes"); Post-Gazette, 26, climbed from $3 million to $10 million.Book value per share of referred as "board Pittsburgh Mar. 1946. 12 "The Cover," Business Week, May 11, 1946, 8; B.B.Somervell to D.D. Eisenhower, stock, $26 1946, nearly $50 1951. 1951, common in was in After May 9, 1946, Eisenhower Papers, Dwight D.Eisenhower Library, Abeliene, Kan.; B.B. sales and profits leveled off somewhat, and in1954, they sagged Somervell to G.C. Marshall, Oct. 7,1946, Somervell Papers, U.S. Army MilitaryHistory considerably, largely because ofa drop indefense orders following Institute, Carlisle Barracks, Pa. 13 the end of the Korean War and a decline inorders for steel plants Interview withFletcher Byrom,July 12, 1989, Carefree, Az.;interview withDouglas Grymes, July 22, 1989, Pittsburgh. in that accompanied reduced operations the steel industry. Part of 14 Interview with George M.Walker, July 26, 1989, White Stone, Va.; board minutes, Koppers' surge could be attributed to the favorable economic July 16 and 29, 1946; Koppers News, Aug.-Sept. 1946;New York Times, Sept. 26, 1946. climate of the post-1945 boom, and Koppers had always had good 15 Interview with George M.Walker, July 26, 1989, White Stone, Va. 16 For people workingfor it.But equally important were the greater discussions ofSomervell's reporting system, see board minutes, Jan. 27, 1947; General Brehon Somervell, Organization Controls inIndustry (New York, 1948); efficiency expansion brought to and the controlled that Somervell "Somervell Uses a MilitaryIdea to Run Koppers Co.," Business Week, May 14, 1949, 70-5; the company. Exercising fingertip control through his ownmixof "HowGen. Somervell Runs Koppers," Modern Industry, May 15, 1949, 67-72; "The managerial practices, Somervell integrated the autonomous Control Section: ANew Aid to Management," Modern Management, Oct. 1949, 4-9;B.B.

88 Pittsburgh History, Summer 1995 Somervell to G.C. Marshall, May 31, 1949, Library Files, George C. Marshall Research 30, and Dec. 30, 1946; Koppers Company Annual Report for 1946. Library,Lexington, Va.;F. Davis toj.Hewes, June 27, 1975, Somervell Papers. 29 New York Times, July 1, 1947,Jan. 1,1949, Jan. 2,1952, and Sept. 9,1953; Murray E. 17 Quoted in "Comeback ofKoppers," 137. Crain, "How Koppers Launched a New Product for 53% Gain," Industrial Marketing, 18 Interview withDouglas Grymes, July 22, 1989, Pittsburgh. Nov. 1949, 65; "Comeback ofKoppers," 140 and 142;Koppers Company Annual Reports 19 Interview withFletcher Byrom,July 12, 1989, Carefree, Az.; "Comeback ofKoppers," for 1952, 1953, 1954, 1955; "Koppers' Step to Profits," Chemical Week, Jan. 1, 1955, 80. 137. 30 "Comeback ofKoppers," 68, 72, 138, and 140; New York Times, Dec. 5,1947, and May 20 Interview with Walter McCutcheon, Aug. 9, 1988, Pittsburgh, Pa. 2, 1949; Koppers News, Feb. 1948; "Koppers Geared to High Production Levels as 1951 21 Interview withDouglas Grymes, July 22, 1989, Pittsburgh, Pa.; interview with Opens," Blast Furnace and Steel Plant, Jan. 1951, 108; "Koppers Plans More Expansion in George M. Walker, July 26, 1989, White Stone, Va.; interview withFletcher Byrom,July 1952," Blast Furnace and Steel Plant, Feb. 1952, 230-1. 12, 1989, Carefree, Az. 31 Interview with Douglas Grymes, July 22, 1989, Pittsburgh; interview with Walter 22 "Koppers' Foy: All-Round Swamper," Fortune, June 1955, 130; interview withMrs. McCutcheon, Aug. 9,1988, Pittsburgh; interview withB.T. Larkin, Aug. 2, 1989, Fred C. Foy, Aug. 7,1989, Ligonier, Pa. Valencia, Pa.; interview with Mrs. Fred C. Foy, Aug. 7, 1989, Ligonier, Pa.; B.T. Larkin 23 Board minutes, Jan. 27 and Feb. 24, 1947; B.B. Somervell to A.M.Scaife, Nov.26, to the Commanding Officer, Fort Lee, Va., May 4,1989, copy in author's possession; 1947, Somervell Papers; interview withFletcher Byrom,July 12, 1989, Carefree, Az.; interview with George M.Walker, July 26, 1989, White Stone, Va. interview withDouglas Grymes, July 22, 1989, Pittsburgh; Brehon Somervell, 32 B.B. Somervell to W Chandler, Dec. 5, 1950, Somervell Papers. "Leadership," address given at executive orientation at Koppers, Apr. 20, 1948, Beazer 33 Hersh, The MellonFamily, 383;board minutes, Mar. 27, 1950; Foy, Ovens, Chemicals and East Inc. Records; Koppers News, May 1948 and May 1949. Men!, 31-2. 24 B.B. Somervell to D.D. Eisenhower, Jan. 27, 1947, Eisenhower Papers; address by 34 Interview withFletcher Byrom,July 12, 1989, Carefree, Az.;interview withDouglas Gen. Somervell, Jan. 23, 1947, Beazer East Inc. Records; Koppers News, Mar. 1947. Grymes, July 22, 1989, Pittsburgh; "The Long Road Back," Forbes, Sept. 15, 1961, 38; 25 Board minutes, Feb. 3, 1948;Pittsburgh Press, Feb. 5, 1948; Koppers Company Annual "Miracles Take Longer," Forbes, Oct. 1, 1964, 47-8; "The Unstructured Management at Report for 1948. Koppers," Business Week, July 28, 1973, 42-4; Arthur M.Louis, "AnAwesome Mind was 26 Interview withFletcher Byrom, July 12, 1989, Carefree, Az.;New York Times, Dec. 31, Fletcher Byrom's Secret Weapon," Fortune, July 1976, 112, 114-117, 184, 186, and 188; 1947, andJan. 6, 1952; board minutes, Oct. 31, 1949; Koppers News, Nov.-Dec. 1949; "Now Remove the Handicap," Forbes, Dec. 1,1976, 74-6; "Conversation withFletcher "Verona Research Center," Koppers Magazine, Spring 1952; interview withFletcher Byrom," Organizational Dynamics, Summer 1978, 37-47; Thomas Jaffe, "See Mein a Year Byrom,July 12, 1989, Carefree, Az.;interview with George M.Walker, July 26, 1989, and a Half," Forbes, Nov. 10, 1980, 61 and 65;Jay McCormick, "AWord from Captain White Stone, Va.; interview withB.T. Larkin, Aug. 2,1989, Valencia, Pa.; Pittsburgh Post- Caution," Forbes, Feb. 25, 1985, 72-3; "Koppers Passing the Road Back to Profits," Gazette, Aug. 29, 1961. Business Week, Apr.14, 1986, 62-3; "Why Koppers Fell Before Beazer's Bulldozer," 27 New York Times, May 29,June 1, and Oct. 26, 1947; "General Somervell Says: Business Week, June 20, 1988, 82-4. Industry Must Act Now to Stop World War III,"Factory Management and Maintenance, 35 B.B. Somervell to W. de Krafft,July 23, 1951, Somervell Papers; "Comeback of Aug.1947, 66-71; "Actual Plan for Defense," MillandFactory, June 1948, 128-9; "Industry Koppers," 67-8 and 142; Koppers Company Annual Report for 1954; Commercial and Makes Its War Plans," Business Week, Aug. 19, 1950, 26;Koppers News,July 12, 1954. Financial Chronicle, May 26, 1955. 28 Interview withGeorge M.Walker, July 26, 1989, White Stone, Va.; Pittsburgh Press, 36 Interview with George M.Walker, July 26, 1989, White Stone, Va.; interview with June 14, 1946; New York Times, Aug. 28 and Dec. 31, 1946; board minutes, Aug. 26, Sept. Fletcher Byrom,July 12, 1989, Carefree, Az.

Photograph Credits

Director's Gallery General Brehon Somervell Page 51,73 Historical Society of Western Page 78 Courtesy Beazer East Inc. Archives Page 80 From The Shaping ofthe Point, by Robert K.Alberts 's Aluminum Furniture (Univ. of Pittsburgh Press, 1980). Used by Page 52 Courtesy Alcoa Archives permission. Page 54 Top, Courtesy Allegheny-Kiski Valley Historical Page 81 Courtesy National Archives Society, Tarentum, Pa.; bottom, Alcoa Archives. Page 82 National Archives Page 55 From Ladies HomeJournal, 1902 Page 85 Historical Society of Western Pennsylvania Archives Page 56 Historical Society of Western Pennsylvania P age 87 Courtesy U.S. ArmyMilitaryHistory Institute Archives Reviews Page 57 Alcoa Archives Page 91 From Portraits inSteel, by Milton Rogovin and Page 58 Allegheny-KiskiValley Historical Society Michael Frisch (Cornell Univ. Press, 1993). Used Page 59-64 Alcoa Archives by permission. TillDeath Us Do Part Page 66-72 Allphotographs courtesy author and family Babe's Forbes Field Farewell Page 74-77 Courtesy National Baseball Hallof Fame, Cooperstown, N.Y.

89 The Revival ofKoppers