Personality, not rank or connection, decided Horkheimer’s directorship.

Evidence

Horkheimer was the more talented and ambitious of the two, while Pollock was submissive, satisfied with his role as an administrator and economist. It was this which led to Horkheimer’s becoming director of the Institute instead of Pollock, although Pollock was Grünberg’s deputy, a close friend of Weil’s, and had been a member of the Institute’s staff from the start. Pollock’s publications and administrative abilities, which were anything but inspiring, meant that there were no protests against this development, or at least none worth mentioning. By the beginning of the 1930s Pollock was thus firmly established in his role as administrative director and financial officer of the Institute, and as chairman of the Society for Social Research. — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School, 250

Categorization

• XREF: Mirrors the Pollock-Horkheimer written contract of ch6 and the enduring intellectual division of labor between the two. — connects to: Horkheimer’s directorship was secured via a compromise chair split across two faculties; Personal temperament, not seniority, decided the Institute’s directorship
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 250