The absolute necessity of clearly defined authorities that every man connected with an organization may know from whom he is to receive orders, is well recognized. When we get above the one-man business, employes are not left in doubt as to the _source_ of their orders. Why then should there be left the slightest chance of misunderstanding as to the _nature_ of their orders? When we issue orders that are to be executed by someone outside of our own organization, we are careful that they are in writing. If an order for goods is placed by telephone or telegraph it is confirmed in writing, not alone for the legal protection afforded by a valid contract, but that there may be no confusion or misunderstanding. When we receive an order we prefer to have it in writing for the same reasons. The success of any undertaking is largely dependent on the proper execution of orders. Surely, orders to be executed within the organization are of equal importance to those that will be executed by an outsider, and at least the same care should be exercised in issuing them. The logical conclusion then is that they should be given in writing. True, oral instructions are sometimes necessary, but all orders and instructions of importance should be in writing. There are many classes of internal orders, depending on the nature of the business. Among them is a class of inter-departmental communications more in the nature of correspondence than direct orders. In the harmonious operation of an organization, many requests are made between departments; general orders affecting all departments are given by the manager; bulletins are issued by a department manager to all employes under him--all of these should be in writing. As an illustration, take a special order from a customer. A salesman reports that an order can be secured for certain goods provided some slight change is made in the design. The sales manager will communicate with the superintendent about the cost of making the changes. The question then goes to the general manager for a final decision. Imagine the chances for argument if these negotiations are carried on orally, but if in writing, what each man said is on record and entirely clear. [Illustration: Fig. 12. Blank Used for Interdepartment Correspondence] No elaborate form is needed for these communications, but it is best to use a form differing from that used in the regular correspondence. A simple form is shown in Fig. 12. The form should always show from what department it comes, and, to avoid confusion, it is an excellent plan to use a distinctive color for each department. Each department should keep a file of these house communications, including carbon copies of those issued by them. It is frequently necessary to follow up their requests to secure reasonably prompt action.