Encyclopedia of Sociology

DIVISION OF LABOR

influence on mobility, prejudice, conflict, affilia-
tion, intermarriage, and inequality. In Blau’s
scheme, a society may be undifferentiated (all
persons or positions are independent, self-suffi-
cient, etc.) or strongly differentiated (a high de-
gree of specialization and interdependence). This
differentiation may be a matter of degree, on
dimensions such as authority, power, prestige,
etc.; this constitutes inequality. Or the differentia-
tion may be a matter of kind, such as occupational
differentiation—the division of labor.

Blau, like Durkheim, distinguished two major
types of division of labor: routinization and expert
specialization.

The two major forms of division of labor are
the subdivision of work into repetitive routines
and its subdivision into expert specialities...
when jobs are divided into repetitive routines,
the training and skills needed to perform them
are reduced, whereas when they are divided
into fields of specialists, the narrower range of
tasks permits greater expertness to be acquired
and applied to the work, increasing the
training and skills required to perform it.
(Blau 1977, p. 188)
Blau has shown that the division of labor
always increases inequality in the organization.
The managerial and technical experts coordinate
the increasing number and diversity of routinized
positions. As organizations and societies increase
in size and population density, the division of
labor increases. At the same time, the forces of
industrialization and urbanization require and en-
courage further specialization, and in most cases,
increase inequality, and indirectly, social integra-
tion. Some of the confounding boundaries in-
clude the degree of linguistic, ethnic, or cultural
heterogeneity (all of which can inhibit integra-
tion), and social or geographic mobility (which can
increase integration).

In a rare display of explicitly stated definitions
and propositions, Blau created a landmark theory
of social organization. Here are the most impor-
tant of Blau’s assumptions and theorems relating
to the division of labor:

• The division of labor depends on opportu-
  nities for communication.


• Population density and urbanization in-
  crease the division of labor.
  
  
  • Rising levels of education and qualifi-
    cations promote an advanced division
    of labor.
  
  
  • Large work organizations promote the
    division of labor in society.
  
  
  • Linguistic heterogeneity impedes the divi-
    sion of labor.
  
  
  • The more the division of labor is in
    the form of specialization rather than
    routinization, the higher are rates of
    associations among different occupations,
    which produces higher integration.
  
  
  • The more the division of labor intersects
    with other nominal parameters (includ-
    ing kinship, language, religion, ethnicity,
    etc.) the greater is the probability that
    intergroup relations strengthen society’s
    integration.
  
  
  • The smaller an organization, the more
    its internal division of labor increas-
    es the probabilities of intergroup and
    interstratum associations, and therefore
    the higher the degree of integration.
    (Summarized from Blau 1977, pp.
    214–215)
  
  
  
  

Blau concludes by noting that ‘‘Advances in

the division of labor tend to be accompanied by

decreases in various forms of inequality but by

increases in inequality in power. Although the

advancing division of labor does not generate the

growing concentration of power, the two are likely

to occur together, because the expansion of work

organizations promotes both.’’ (p. 214).

CONCLUSION

Ford’s moving assembly lines began to produce

the frames for Model T automobiles in 1913, at a

rate of about one every two working days, but

within months, refinements on the assembly proc-

ess reduced this to four units per day. This eightfold

increase in efficiency was accompanied by a de-

crease in the price of the cars and indirectly stimu-

lated a very large industry. Now, automated facto-

ries, using robotics and highly specialized computer

systems, have dramatically increased the efficiency

of the automobile industry. The effects on morale

and the environment, however, appear to be less

salutary.