The division of labor, the process by which members of society perform
ever specified types of work, has received much theoretical discussion in
social thought. Here is a summary of three important theories regarding the
division of labor by Adam Smith, Karl Marx and Emile Durkheim.
Adam Smith's theory on the division of labor
Adam Smith saw the division of labor as a positive source of growing productiveness
of industrial capitalist markets. In An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations Smith ties the division of labor and the
differentiation of skills with increased productivity. Smith gives the example
of a pin, when a single worker capable of producing a lesser number of pins per
day on his own compared with a much greater number of a single task which is a
part of the process when taken apart to different components.
Karl Marx's theory on the division of labor
Karl Marx agrees with Adam Smith on the
notion that the division of labor is a central part of capitalism, but he disagrees
on how favorable this process is in social terms. Marx argues that the division
of labor brings about alienation, with the worker no longer feeling associated
with the product of his own labor. In addition, Marx held that the result of
the growing division of labor is the workers become less skilled, being able
the perform only specific tasks which do not amount to a whole products, thus
making them less autonomous and more dependent on their employer who gains
leverage. On this ground Marx ties the division of labor with social mechanism
of control. For more see our summary on Marx's
Perception of History in The German Ideology: praxis, property and the division of labor.
Emile Durkheim's theory on the division of labor.
In accordance with Smith, Durkheim also views the division of labor as characteristic
of industrial capitalist societies. Durkheim even saw the division of labor as
a natural law that also governs other organisms. But like Marx, Durkheim
pointed out, in his book Division
of Labor in Society, to the negative aspect of the process which turns
people more interdependent yet increasingly different from each other, resulting
in a disability to share their view of the world and form ontological
solidarity.