Home › Mortgage › Division of labor. The first and second social division of labor: causes, essence and consequences See what “Division of Labor” is in other dictionaries

Division of labor. The first and second social division of labor: causes, essence and consequences See what “Division of Labor” is in other dictionaries

Why does division of labor and specialization improve productivity? and got the best answer

Answer from Nikolay Golubtsov[guru]
The simpler the work, the easier it is to teach, the easier it is to control, the easier it is to increase the speed of work.

Reply from Ѐilgrim[guru]
That's what NOT says.

Reply from Nikolay Mavrin[guru]
Objective reality.

Reply from Imur Ivanov[guru]
It depends. It depends on how this work is provided and organized as a whole. If there are enough narrow specialists to complete each cycle of the production process, then of course it helps. If, for example, you have a private enterprise in which only a janitor sweeps the porch and another person who can very skillfully perform only one production operation works, and 50 are required, then of course not... doesn't help.

Reply from N_esta[newbie]
""Specialization in the production process. A set of works can usually be completed cheaper by a large number people each performing a small number of specialized tasks rather than one person attempting to complete all the work. The idea that specialization reduces costs, and thus the consumer pays the price, is embedded in the principle of comparative advantage. Division of labor is the basic principle underlying the assembly line in mass production systems. ""

Reply from NO[guru]
An innate property of all living things, including Humans, is the desire to reduce the costs of one’s activity in order to achieve any goal. When repeating similar conditions for achieving similar or identical goals, learning how to achieve a goal means selecting the least expensive method. And labor productivity is the amount of expenditure (no matter what - calories, time) to obtain the goal - the product.

Reply from Andrey Kuznetsov[expert]
It’s more convenient, easier and clearer for a person to work this way.

Division of labor

Division of labor- historically established process of isolation, modification, consolidation individual species labor activity, which flows into social forms differentiation and implementation of various types of work activities.

There are:

General division of labor by branches of social production;

Private division of labor within industries;

Single division of labor within organizations according to technological, qualification and functional characteristics.

It is the reason for increasing the overall labor productivity of an organized group of specialists (synergetic effect) due to:

Developing skills and automaticity in performing simple repetitive operations
Reducing the time spent transitioning between different operations

The concept of the division of labor is described quite fully by Adam Smith in the first three chapters of his five-volume treatise, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations.

Highlight social division of labor- distribution of social functions among people in society - and international division of labor.

Social division labor- this is the division of labor primarily into productive and managerial labor. (F. Engels “Anti-Dühringe” op., vol. 20, p. 293)

The division of labor led to modern world to the presence of a huge variety of different professions and industries. Previously (in ancient times), people were forced to almost completely provide themselves with everything they needed; this was extremely ineffective, which led to a primitive life and comfort. Almost all achievements of evolution, scientific and technological progress can be explained by the continuous introduction of the division of labor. Thanks to the exchange of the results of labor, that is, trade, the division of labor becomes possible in society.

From the point of view of business engineering, division of labor is a functional decomposition of business processes. It is often possible to isolate such part of the functions as a separate type, which then becomes possible to entrust to automation or a machine. Thus, the division of labor continues to occur today and has a close connection, for example, with automation processes. In the field of intellectual work, its division is also possible and very useful.

The division of labor is the first link in the entire labor organization system. Division of labor is separation various types labor activity and division labor process into parts, each of which is performed by a specific group of workers, united according to common functional, professional or qualification characteristics.

For example, the main method of work in accounting is the division of labor of specialists. We distribute the work of employees across areas accounting under the guidance of leading specialists and auditors, which allows them to achieve maximum efficiency of their work. Thus, we dynamically combine developments in the field of accounting automation and experience in the field of administration of accounting services.

Division of labor- DIVISION OF LABOR, differentiation, specialization of labor activity, coexistence of its various types. Social division of labor differentiation in society of various social functions performed by certain groups of people, and the allocation ... Illustrated Encyclopedic Dictionary

DIVISION OF LABOR- (division of labor) A system in accordance with which specialization occurs in the production process. It has two advantages: first, workers specialize in those types of work in which they have a comparative advantage (comparative... ... Economic dictionary

Division of labor- (division of labor) Specialization of workers in the production process (or any other economic activity). Adam Smith (1723–1790) in his work The Wealth of Nations described the division of labor as one of the greatest contributions to the increase... ... Dictionary of business terms

Division of labor- division labor functions between members of the work team (team, team) in accordance with the division of the production process into component processes and operations. [Adamchuk V.V., Romashov O.V., Sorokina M.E. Economics and sociology... ... Encyclopedia of terms, definitions and explanations of building materials

division of labor- Differentiation of people’s activities in the process of joint work. [GOST 19605 74] Topics: organization of labor, production... Technical Translator's Guide

DIVISION OF LABOR- English division of labour; German Arbeitsteilung. 1. A functionally integrated system of production roles and specializations within society. 2. According to E. Durkheim necessary condition material and intellectual development of society; source… … Encyclopedia of Sociology

Books

Justice in the national economy. Division of labor, G. Schmoller. Readers are invited to a book by the famous German economist and historian Gustav Schmoller, dedicated to the study of problems national economy. In the first part of the book, the author tries...

Primitive communal model of economic development: main stages of formation and features.

Signs:

Low level of development productive forces and their slow improvement

Collective appropriation of natural resources and production results

Equal distribution, social equality

Lack of private property, exploitation, classes and state

Low rates of development of society.

Stages:

Paleolithic (ancient Stone Age) – 3 million – 12 thousand years BC

Mesolithic (Middle Stone Age) – 12 – 8 thousand years BC.

Neolithic (New Stone Age) – 8 – 3 thousand years BC.

1st early Paleolithic (up to 100 thousand years BC). Pithecanthropus, Sinanthropus, Neanderthals - gathering, fishing and driven hunting.

2-Middle Paleolithic (ended 40 thousand years ago). Cro-Magnon man along with Neanderthals. Articulate speech. Making fire. Stone technology.

3-Late Paleolithic (ended in the 12th millennium BC). Matriarchy. Social prohibitions. Simple appropriative economy - hunting, fishing and gathering. The level of stone technology has increased. Labor as simple cooperation without division. Everything is collectively owned. Labor distribution of production. Exchange between communities.

4-Mesolithic (XII-VIII millennium BC). Individual hunt. Improvement of weapons, appearance of the bow. New techniques in fishing. Lightening the weight and reducing the volume of stone tools. The appropriative economy of lower hunter-gatherers and fishermen. The principle of collectivization. Use of boats. Development of new lands. Several nearby clans began to unite into a tribe. Patriarchy.

5-Neolithic (VIII-IV millennium BC). The first social division of labor into agriculture and cattle breeding. Then the second social division of labor - the separation of crafts from agriculture– individualization of labor, the emergence and development of private property. The first craft is pottery production. "Neolithic Revolution" - emergence new technology, forms of production and way of life, development of new territories and their effective use. The origin of exchange – because surplus agricultural and handicraft industries appeared. Transition to a sedentary lifestyle.

6th Eneolithic (4-3 thousand BC). The appearance of metals - copper, gold, bronze. The system of irrigated and plow agriculture, increasing wealth inequality.

The first and second social division of labor: causes, essence and consequences.

First division of labor:

Prerequisites:

The emergence and spread of agriculture in fertile areas, then the domestication of animals, which often provided greater income than agriculture. Some tribes even completely switched to cattle breeding.

Essence:

In the total mass of primitive tribes, two groups were distinguished: pastoral and agricultural.

Consequences:

1. transition to a sedentary lifestyle

2. increase in labor productivity

3. the possibility of accumulating reserves (wealth)

4. the origin of trade (in-kind exchange)

5. development of religion and art.

Second division of labor:

Reasons:

The emergence of free time due to increased labor productivity (less time and energy was required to obtain food), the emergence and development of crafts.

Essence:

Separation of crafts from agriculture.

Consequences:

1. individualization of labor

2. development of private property

RESULT:

Transition to a producing economy:

Variety of products intended for exchange

Extensive exchange system

The need to introduce a universal equivalent.

The division of labor is a process that develops historically through the separation, change and consolidation of some. It is realized in society in the form of its members performing various jobs.

In ancient times, people were forced to provide everything for themselves. This was so ineffective and only contributed to the preservation of primitive life that even then the first social division of labor took place. It became possible thanks to the advent of trade. You can read more about this at the beginning of Adam Smith's treatise.

There is a distinction between social division of labor and international division. The last type is a way of organizing the economy in the world when each country specializes in the production of a specific type of services or goods and then exchanges them. And the social division of labor is when social functions distributed among members of society. First of all, two large groups can be distinguished: managerial work and productive work.

The basic principle of the division of labor is the combination of the specialization of a particular employee with an increase in his technical level, and therefore productivity.

The faster development occurs latest technologies, the more complex the processes become for the division of labor, which must correspond to them, not stand still, but also develop and deepen. This is due to the fact that its forms influence many aspects: the equipment of work places, their maintenance, and specialization. The methods and methods of work and its norms also depend on them. Various shapes its divisions and cooperation ensure an even load on workers and synchronization of their work.

The essence of the division of labor is to identify those that do not represent the entire production process, but its individual parts and are assigned to specific workers. This is done so that it is possible to execute in parallel various operations. It also speeds up the acquisition of skills by workers.

At the same time, at an enterprise, the social division of labor can be carried out in the following forms: subject, technological, functional, program-targeted, qualification and professional.

When it is divided into separate technological operations, phases or stages, a technological division of labor occurs. It depends on the type of work and can be operational, substantive and detailed.

Functional division of labor occurs when a specific type of work is performed by a group of workers who specialize in performing certain functions.

The professional division of labor depends on the type of profession acquired by specialists. Workers perform in their places only the type of work that lies within the scope of their acquired profession.

The qualification division of labor is caused by differences in the level of knowledge and experience of workers.

Production in production by employees and departments specific types production causes a substantive division of labor. These could be, for example, parts, products, assemblies.

The essence of the linear division of labor (included in the functional division) is the establishment of managers at a certain facility (workshop, site). Their rights, roles and responsibilities are clearly delineated.

The formation of groups of workers in order to solve specific problems forms a program-targeted division of labor. In practice, this looks like recruiting teams (creative, labor) for a while.

The volume of products produced, its complexity and other factors influence which form of division of labor to choose. Such features, in turn, give rise to certain boundaries of labor.

As the concentration of tools develops, the division of labor also develops, and vice versa *. That is why every major invention in the field of mechanics is followed by an increase in the division of labor, and every increase in the division of labor leads, in turn, to new inventions in mechanics.
K. Marx “The Poverty of Philosophy”

Please don't ask me why this is a topic. What’s wrong with it when another catastrophe has already occurred in the country. The fact is that this is the second part of the beginning, which never saw the light of day. The first part was recognized, and not without reason, a little bit. And it’s good, because there was nothing special about it. The most interesting things accumulated in the second part.
Economists since the time of Adam Smith know exactly what this division of labor is and why. Some of them, from time to time, even rely on it in their reflections. Despite all this, the very definition and history of this phenomenon in public life you won’t find it in modern economics textbooks, no matter how anyone convinces you otherwise. I was looking here myself recently. However, there is the Internet, and I didn’t have to suffer for long. The division of labor there is declared to be a universal law, according to which this very division makes it possible to increase the efficiency of production by simplifying labor and, associated with this, automation; reducing the transition time from operation to operation, etc. It would seem like a well-known banality! True, this is after a good lunch and a couple of glasses of something refreshing. And so, in working hours, in the morning, and on an empty stomach, I really want to trample on the tender bodies of the humanities!
Well, tell me, how many parts could this or that work be divided into during the feudal period of history? In my opinion, exactly as much as it itself was divided into with a rational approach to it. The first and, apparently, the only time. The same Marx, in the work cited above, says that in Germany, for example, the division between village and city functionally lasted for several centuries. Probably simply because stupid people lived there in those days. They studied poorly and did not know the universal law, otherwise they would have taken advantage of it long ago. Or, with the simplification of certain types of work in the overall technical process. Tell me, are there many people in society who want to, say, wash floors or vacuum an office? And the work of, for example, a janitor is not a good example of simplicity and lack of people willing? That is, even if you divided the work into parts based on your profit, it is still far from a fact that someone will easily do it. It's another matter when there is nowhere to go. When family and unemployment! This is the first one. The second on the list for business entities has always been the issue of control over what the worker actually does while he is on duty. Don’t put a controller in front of everyone! Then, the question arises, who will control the controller himself? Crazy life!!! But they decided everything was simple. Now this is called standardization of working time: determining the quantity of products produced in a certain time with a certain payment rate. Imagine how simple and understandable this thing is! And how much grief she brought... It’s easy to write on paper, but try to do it! Now you can reveal the trick itself with the effectiveness of the “law”. You come to work with me. Simple operation: You will cut metal to a specific length. You will cut 200 pieces per shift. - get one money, have time to cut off 300 - another. But I’m not a tyrant, and in order to somehow live you will have to cut off something like 250 pieces, while the fastest, squeezing everything out of themselves, manage to cut 350 pieces. Don't want to? There are 10 more people outside the door to take your place. Free choice behind you... I wonder what kind of asshole you have to be to declare this abomination a universal law of humanity?
The situation was seriously changed only by the invention of machines. They began to set the pace of work, and the worker became their servant. A new turn in the history of the division of labor occurred at the very moment when industry penetrated into the field of micrometers. Precision equipment and experienced personnel were required. Once again, the worker was able to feel like a craftsman using a powerful tool to transform materials. Scientific and technological progress, which developed from the private efforts of individuals into a powerful wizard, transformed society in its own way, thereby consolidating a new division of labor. However, already in our present time there has been a slight hitch with this very scientific and technological progress. They say he died. I haven't checked, but there is every reason to think so. And this can indicate at least two unpleasant situations. Firstly, no new division of labor can revive the deceased, no matter how many lively economists claim this. Secondly, any existing system, after development has stopped, begins to deteriorate and crumble. And if we consider that most of the current division took shape in the late 70s and early 80s, then very unpleasant conclusions can be drawn. True, some assure everyone of some breakthrough technologies, but let’s not talk about sad things, but consider this moment.
As you understand, the division of labor in the production of goods is not an invention of producers. It was a kind of formalized copy of the functional division that existed in society. Just like society, it evolved from stage to stage until, already in the time close to us, it went beyond industrial production and did not become the dominant idea of a rational lifestyle.
The fact is that, in general, any division leads to inequality in society. Exactly the same as if you ask someone to cut a pie with a dull knife and with their eyes closed. For a long time, thinkers of all stripes tried to solve the question of an ideal social order - in essence, they tried to understand by what means they could cut the social pie into equal parts. Well, or at least somehow equalize the already cut parts. And, in general, nothing worked for them until a certain moment: before the bourgeois revolutions and the beginning of capitalist relations. Thinkers were greatly hampered by the generally accepted division of society into classes. Or more precisely, it would be to say – on statuses. That is, society recognized certain situations that could only be taken into account. Pray or curse them, but do not change them. This existed for quite a long time until a new god appeared in society - science, who allowed everything to be changed and reformed, based on the so-called scientific method. This very method led to the emergence of ideas about a new production process(division of labor), which in the era of capitalist relations significantly enriched its owner. What else did Western society need? And then the idea appeared that society, for its own prosperity, must submit to scientifically based division. Well, you know what happened next. There was only one discrepancy in this entire socialist project - the first attempt to create a man-made (artificial) society. It turned out that the mass of the people did not think scientifically. And often I didn’t even think about it, no matter how much the responsible employees wanted it. He was taught and educated, punished and encouraged, inspired and set as an example. But it didn’t work, and a generation later it “broke through”: now in the place of the once powerful Union, something completely different.
It is important to note that for the sustainability of society, it is not the functional division itself that is of interest, but the possibility of its reproduction in subsequent generations. Such a society has already existed in history, and we often call it a traditional society. Capitalism, as befits a new system, destroyed it, establishing its own rules. The revolution in Russia of 1917 did the same thing. After the ideological battles between the two political systems subsided, it became clear that both one and the other were only two sides of the same coin, cast scientific and technological progress. Its appearance and powerful growth led to the fact that humanity began to determine its future by solving problems current moment. If earlier, figuratively speaking, humanity lived with its head turned backwards, then new times have made it possible to part with this tradition, thanks to the potential scientific discoveries. And he once seemed simply inexhaustible. Nowadays we often hear among young people that there is no future. And this is one of the most serious reasons to send a postcard of condolences to NTP. The USSR was unable to reduce Soviet life to tradition, and after 70 years of struggle for its existence, it collapsed. We have turned our heads back again and are now living in the past. I wonder what awaits the West in this regard? I don’t worry about the East - they lived and developed other life principles. But more about that next time.