Theories of Frederick Taylor and Adam Smith Public Administration

Karl Marx had different views about the division of labor such as how it increases productivity. The way how it

Smith writes in his “Wealth of Nations” that the division of labour betters society. Things can be produced more quickly by a greater number of labourers specializing in a single skill than by a single worker attempting various tasks. This one worker may not be completely apt at all the components to complete the entire desired product. A larger number of workers that can each be well adapted for a certain part of the whole product would be much more

Frederick Taylor (1917) developed scientific management theory (often called "Taylorism") at the beginning of this century. His theory had four basic principles: 1) find the one "best way" to perform each task, 2) carefully match each worker to each task, 3) closely supervise workers, and use reward and punishment as motivators, and 4) the task of management is planning and control.

Adam Smith and Karl Marx are both famous for their philosophies on economics, more specifically the division of labor. For each of them the division of labor is rather similar in its definition, but the outcome of the division of labor differs drastically from Smith to Marx. For Smith the division of labor leads to mass production and allows large amounts of people to get things that were once available only to the rich. Smith believes that small specialized tasks leads to the invention of new technologies, and that individuals working selfishly to better themselves in the capitalistic world is beneficial to everyone. For Marx the division of labor is more about the relationship between the employee and the employer. He believes that

As the famous rap group Mobb Deep once said, “Cash rules everything around me cream, get the money. Dollar dollar bill yalllll”, they weren’t lying. If one that gets things done is money, and in order to get money these corporation use the strategic ideology of division of labor to get their products going. Division of labor is a practice that every corporation does with its workers. It narrows specialization of tasks within a production process so that each worker can become a specialist in doing one thing. Especially on an assembly line. In traditional industries, division of labor is a major motive force for economic-growth. With this practice products get finished quicker and sold quicker as well, which brings in the money flowing hence why it’s an important practice and its everywhere. At restaurants, we have waiters/servers, host, cooks, managers, food runners, and busser, this gets people seated faster, attended to quicker, and food cooked in a timely manner (most times). I believe without this a lot of places would in fact be a mess without, just like Emile Durkheim. She believes that division of labor is beneficial to our society and I mostly agree with her statement. Karl Marx also finds Division of Labor necessary to have multiple number of workers under one capitalist. As for Adam Smith, his main focus is growth. Smith believes that growth is rooted in the practice of division of labor. Each of these people agree that division of labor is a necessity in our

In fact, he believed that the division of labor was conducive to the wealth of state and brings efficiency to the economic labor system. While Marx believed the division of labor to be the inhibitor of self-realization, Smith believed would be what produced efficiency and fostered a productive economy that produces more wealth. His example in his work The Wealth of Nations, of a pin factory, Smith clearly proves this fact of efficiency that division of labor produces. He writes of two workers working in this system and that if one worker makes a whole pin, it takes longer and only produces 200 pins in a day. Yet, when the production of one pin is divided into several parts, the workers are able to make 48,000 pins in a day (Smith WN: 45). Unlike, Marx and Engels, Smith believes that this work is allocated based on peoples’ in-born talents. While Marx believes that this sort of work strays away from man’s realization of his species being and that his work is something that is not natural to him, Smith believes the opposite and that the division of labor caters to peoples’ specific, natural

The first book, “Of the causes of improvement…,” talks about the division of labor and the wage of labors. According to Smith, there are three advantage of division of labor. First, it increases the employees’ dexterity; second it decreases the amount of time it consumes to make the product; and third reason is that because of the many inventions of machine, each employee can perform the work of many. Smith thought division of labor is important because labors can be more efficient if they are specialized in specific work.

Structure is the basis through which an organization seeks to create control the direction of an organization. This is completed through clear definitions of the allocation of work, differentiation, and the coordination of having those responsibilities working together towards the efforts of the organization, integration (Bolman & Deal, 1993, pp). Through these methods, the organization is able to devise a division of labor that collaborates to bring about the missions and goals of an organization. The structure that comes about from this can be varied in their rigidness and flexibility it allows, and to an extent this is a great contribution to its success.

Division of labor increases production efficiencies. According to Adam Smith, “huge efficiencies can be gained by breaking production down into many small

However there were also downsides to this complex division of labor. He worried that without the need for co-operation, people would not make the things that other people needed. Without this flow of people doing things for each other, how would society stay formed and efficient, when there were no longer strong religious views, Ethnic minorities etc?

He claims that "The greatest improvement in the productive powers of labour, and the great part of the skill, dexterity, and judgment with which it is any where directed, or applied, see to have been the effects of the division of labour" Smith gives the example of a small pin factory with ten workings employed in it. He states that if the ten workers make pins by themselves, they would only product twenty pins or less per person each day. If the workers divide up the task and each specialize in one or two simple procedure, the factory can produce the equivalent of 4800 pins per person everyday. Further more, since it takes less labor to produce more, commodities will become more affordable. "The wages of labour would have augmented with every improvement in its productive powers, to which the division of labour gives occasion. All things would gradually have become cheaper. They would have been produced by a smaller quantity of labour." With the increase in productivity and decrease in price from the division of labor, society will accumulate enough wealth and welfare for everyone.

He begins by making a basic statement, saying that he's going to talk about what counts as the "wealth" of a country and how certain countries tend to have more wealth per person than others. Smith wanted to figure out how many modernized countries have fared differently when it comes to producing wealth. He says “The nation will be better or worse supplied with all the necessaries and conveniences for which it has occasion”. Saying that if the country has everything they need they will be successful. He says that everyone who is able to work, should be working. He starts stating that the greatest improvements in the productive power of labor lie in the division of labor. He gives reasons behind the increase in productivity, “The effects of the division of labour, in the general business of society, will be more easily understood, by considering in what manner it operates in some particular manufactures”. The division of labor creates specific meaning of particular trades or tasks. That makes the laborers more dedicated to their work. With the division of labor, time is being saved. While they are focusing on one task it will get done better. Rather than it having to be done over and over again until it is perfect. The time spent on one task leads to innovation in the ways it gets done and the tools that are being used. Since productivity is now being increased, there are more jobs becoming available. With the

According to Miles et al. (1978, p. 547), an organization is both its purpose and the mechanism constructed to achieve the purpose. It means that the concept of organization is embracing both goals and all the elements that represent unique combination. Miles et al. (1978, p. 553) draws the conclusion that structure and the processes taking place inside the organization are closely aligned; it is hard to speak about one without mentioning the other. It is important to understand the conclusion drawn by Miles et al. (1978). It illustrates how the

We can see that through the division and specialization of labour that Adam Smith’s pin factory

Karl Marx believes that division of labour means a way in which workers of an organization were given a job at which they were good at or at which they had their specialty in. Max Weber viewed division of labour as an important element or characteristic of any bureaucratic organization that is functioning in the modern society. Emile Durkheim believed that division of labour was the outcome of a societal procedure that takes place within the structure of the society than the result of choices that have been made by individuals.