1.8 The Division of Labor and its Advantages and Disadvantages
It is noted that one of the characteristics of industrial societies is the specialization of labor: an item is not fashioned start to finish by one individual, but is the result of several individuals who each perform different tasks. A person who labors in textiles can spend all their time spinning yarn, and never performing any other task involved in the production of clothing.
This is not unique to industrial labor. It has long been noticed that intellectuals specialize in a field of study. While an individual may have a basic knowledge of several disciplines the academic and philosopher specialize in but one.
It follows then that in more mundane pursuits, men specialize in specific tasks. The knowledge of pottery and cloth, while not held in as much esteem, are as different to one another as the knowledge of chemistry and botany, and to be a master of a given craft requires focus on that one craft to the exclusion of others.
Adam Smith was the fist top give the specialization of labor much consideration, and reasoned that the consequence was greater productivity and greater quality resulting from three causes:
- A person who repetitively does the same task gains adeptness and dexterity at that task by virtue of experience.
- A person who repetitively does the same task discovers ways to do it more efficiently and effectively by virtue of logic.
- Time is saved in set-up and break-down of the tools for one type of work versus another.
The parallel is again drawn to academic pursuits: a scholar is more likely to advance the science of chemistry if it is his whole occupation. If his focus drifts among several subjects, he gains little expertise in each and makes extensive progress in none. Within a university setting, great advancement is made when several men who each have specialized knowledge in one discipline work cooperatively to solve a problem, rather than an equal number of men whose individual knowledge is broader and more shallow in the same subjects.
The net effect of specialization is similar to that of technology: it makes better goods in greater amounts and, over time, the price of goods falls in the market as manufacturers copy the success by turning their own laborers from generalists into specialists.
Specialization also gives rise to supporting professions in industry, such as the merchant class. A farmer who attempts to sell his own produce does as poorly as a tailor who attempts to make his own shoes - bartering and bargaining is only an occasional task at which the farmer is not experienced or proficient. Except under "very particular circumstances," neither the farmer nor the manufacturer can achieve the same results in trade as a skilled merchant.
It is not always thus: division of labor, like the adoption of machinery, is productive only when a person who handles a specialized task does so with greater effectiveness and efficiency than oneself. Were it not so, the practice of specialization would be counterproductive.
Demand in the market is also a limiting factor to the division and specialization of labor: it would do little good for ten workmen to produce 48,000 pins in a day if the demand in their entire region is less than half as much.
This is likely a reason that manufacturing emerges only in populous markets. In a small village, it is common for one man to act as barber, surgeon, doctor, and pharmacist; whereas in a populous city, there is sufficient demand for these services for men to specialize in doing but one.
The same can be said of industry: in a small village, there is a single grocer who supplies all food items. In a city such as London or Paris, there are specialty shops such as butchers, fishmongers, bakers, green grocers, and so on, even to the point of having shops that sell a single article such as tea or vinegar. (EN: The emergence of the supermarket in the twentieth century seems to have un-done this, though when you consider the source of his supply, it's clear that food is manufactured by specialists - a company that makes only mustard - and retailed in broader assortment.)
Specialization is not the sole choice of manufacturers, but is driven by the demands of consumers to have the best products at the cheapest prices. In that regard, specialization is a necessary means of competition, and the manufacturer who does not specialize will fail to keep customers.
In that way, it is not the limited availability of manufacturers to supply small villages and hamlets, but the limited consumption of the citizens of such places that fails to attract or necessitate manufacture.
There's brief reference to fairs and trade caravans, but I'm not sure I take the author's point. It seems to have to do with luxury items and rare goods that are used so rarely and in such small amounts that manufacture is unprofitable, and citizens can buy all they will consume at odd and distant intervals. A small village could not demand enough jewelry to provide a goldsmith with steady employment, but a score of such villages might, if the goods were transported to them in the smaller quantities they demand.
Of the various types of industry, agriculture admits the least degree of specialization. Aside of the need for food everywhere, the nature of the work is seasonable and one man cannot spend all year plowing, but must attend to various tasks at different times of year on the same plot of land. However, framing itself is a kind of specialization, as the farmer produces a few crops in large quantities and trades for other items he needs.
Division of labor also counts upon the divisibility of tasks resulting from the complexity of the product. To grind wheat into flour requires but a single step, and while multiple people can perform the same task to produce a large quantity of flour, they cannot perform different tasks.
Capital reserves are also necessary for specialization of labor: where a good is manufactured by paid employees, the materials must be purchased and their wages paid well in advance of the sale of the goods they manufacture. Depending on the good in question, the manufacturer must pay for the goods a month or more before he will receive the revenue from their sale. As such, poverty may be a factor in the failure of large nations to industrialize.
The movement of capital through a chain of production is also considered: the herdsman bears the expense of maintaining his cattle until they are sold; the tanner bears the costs of buying the skins and preparing them until they are purchased by a cobbler; the cobbler bears the cost of materials and labor until his shoes are sold to the consumer. Not only is the labor subdivided, but so is the financial burden of manufacturing.
Thus far, the advantages of specialization have been considered, but there are also disadvantages that inseparably attend it.
A man whose whole life is devoted to the execution of a single task becomes proficient at that task, but useless for any other occupation. A townsman who has spent his life as a weaver is often so incompetent at carpentry as to be unable to attend to the simple task of mending the broken leg of a chair.
Specialization also leads to drudgery. "To never have done anything but make the eighteenth part of a pin is a sorry account for a human being to give his existence." Such work is commonly wearisome and seldom financially rewarding.
Specialists also sacrifice independence. A tradesman who knows and is fully capable of attending to all the tasks necessary to fashion an object that is of value to others can more easily leave his location and set up shop elsewhere. A factory worker who knows only how to thread a loom can only seek employment in another textile factory, and has no hope of being independent or even self-sufficient.
Because the tasks of a laborer are tedious and of little value outside of a manufacturing operation, they suffer from a lack of negotiating power with their employers. Their skills are easy to teach others, and they have little hope of selling them outside their industry, which enables employers to offer very little in compensation.
Which leads to a similar conclusion as was drawn of technology: consumers benefit from the quality, quantity, and low price of goods made by specialized laborers, but the laborers themselves are disadvantaged.