The American Synthetic Organic Chemicals Industry: War and Politics, 1910-1930

2. American Manufacturers, German Chemicals: Dyes and Pharmaceuticals, 1914–1918

41 2 / American Manufacturers, German Chemicals Dyes and Pharmaceuticals, 1914–1918 At the outbreak of hostilities, American entrepreneurs embraced the manufacture of the signature German synthetic organic chemicals: dyes and pharmaceuticals. While the war heightened uncertainty and risk, not least because of its unpredictable duration, entrepreneurs seized the opportunities born of war. To many in the industry, wresting chemical markets from the German industry also became a patriotic mission larger than themselves . Chaotically launching into domestic manufacturing, Americans faced the daunting reality of German dominance, but many also believed the German experience could offer them guidance and models on which to pattern their industry. Americans wanted the synthetic dyes and pharmaceuticals the Germans had long provided, and most expected an American industry would succeed or fail based on the extent to which they could supply these core German products in such short supply during the war. Americans’ lack of experience and the war economy, however, led entrepreneurs to pursue a range of strategies in attempting to acquire expertise and establish a domestic industry. The German industry’s representatives in the United States, the importing agencies and manufacturing subsidiaries, confronted a difficult predicament . Their experience reflected in microcosm the dramatic, if selective, destruction of the nineteenth-century global economy; through war, the nation-states rejected the expanding economic interdependence of previous decades. For those who had spent their entire careers working with the German industry—some bound by family ties—the disintegration of the international commercial networks carried very personal consequences. The importers and subsidiaries of German firms tried to hold their businesses together in the face of increasing centrifugal forces brought on by war: some turned to manufacturing, some distributed American-made chemicals , and some came apart under the pressure. Ironically, the importers’ 42 / american manufacturers, german chemicals various strategies to survive the disruptions made many of them important contributors to the domestic synthetic organic chemicals industry. Comparisons to the German industry pervaded American thinking, and, despite a few Americans’ attempts to imagine an industrial structure that differed from the German and despite the domestic manufacturers’ multiple strategies, Americans had difficulty conceptualizing a successful industry that varied to any great degree from the German, as they understood it. These concerns played out most explicitly in ongoing discussions about the size of firms in the nascent industry. Small American manufacturers responded most quickly and nimbly to the wartime shortages, sometimes offering just one product to the market. They varied greatly in their experience , whether in technical or managerial skills, and arrived and departed from the market with startling rapidity, often failing in a literal bang of explosive chemicals. Some small firms did well during the war, but many observers and participants believed any durable industry would require large firms that could compete with the German giants in scope and market power. In 1916, one group of investors and entrepreneurs aimed for largescale , integrated production and put together Federal Dyestuff & Chemical Corporation; by the end of the war, believers in big business placed their hope for the domestic industry in National Aniline & Chemical Company and E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Company, the two firms that most deliberately embarked on strategies designed to compete with Germany by manufacturing a broad range of interrelated chemicals. To a great extent, success in the American industry depended on how quickly and effectively the firms could accumulate sufficient organizational and technical abilities. Firms of all sizes needed to create responsive and functioning organizations, and the war both helped and hindered managers ’ quest to establish productive routines, whether in laboratories or factories or sales. On one hand, filled with a sense of exceptional opportunity, entrepreneurs and technical personnel took more risks during the war. On the other hand, the war’s unpredictability hindered managers’ attempts to provide stability long enough to build routines in manufacturing and organization . Manufacturers could hire experienced personnel from elsewhere, but whether they could cohere into a reliable unit was another question. Armed with widely varying sets of individual and collective skills, entrepreneurs ventured into the field with several plans to capture market share inthevolatilebutnewlyinvitingindustry.Iftheyremainedintact,mostfirms extant before the war readily responded to the high prices. Firms such as Schoellkopf, William Beckers, and Monsanto aggressively expanded. New start-ups might aim to make only one chemical for the duration of the war; american manufacturers, german chemicals / 43 others more ambitiously wanted to build a thriving niche firm that would survive...