The Division of Labor as Social Interaction
- 1 February 1976
- journal article
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in Social Problems
- Vol. 23 (3) , 304-313
- https://doi.org/10.2307/799776
Abstract
Adam Smith and Emile Durkheim paid little attention to the concrete substance of the concept of division of labor. What is its empirical referent? Treated as “specialization,” it is historically relative, addressed to the differentiation of social work-roles rather than of technologically “whole” tasks. For human ecologists and structural analysts of organizations, empirical measures of the differentiation of work roles prove to be artifacts of administrative authority: the socially organized power to define work roles and assign people to them. Three different principles and ideologies by which the division of labor can be organized are sketched, along with their consequences for variation in structure and content. Finally, it is noted that the ultimate reality of the division of labor lies in the social interaction of its participants.Keywords
This publication has 8 references indexed in Scilit:
- What Do Bosses Do?Review of Radical Political Economics, 1974
- The Division of Labor: A Post-Durkheimian Analytical ViewAmerican Sociological Review, 1972
- The Measurement Problem in the Analysis of an Ecological Concept: The Division of LaborThe Pacific Sociological Review, 1972
- Hardness of Material as Related to Division of Labor in Manufacturing IndustriesAdministrative Science Quarterly, 1968
- The Professional Association and the Legal Regulation of PracticeLaw & Society Review, 1968
- Urbanization, Technology, and the Division of Labor: Further EvidenceThe Pacific Sociological Review, 1964
- Pathology: A Study of Social Movements within a ProfessionSocial Problems, 1962
- Bureaucratic and Craft Administration of Production: A Comparative StudyAdministrative Science Quarterly, 1959