Division Of Labour Are There Optimal Levels?
ECON2272 Long Paper 1
Division of Labour—are there “optimal” levels?
In his book An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, Smith (1887) has put forward the argument that division of labour helps improve average labour productivity. It was suggested that a lack of specialization hinders labour productivities. However, over the years, scholars have also found out the limitations of practising division of labour, examples include the decrease of incentives for workers due to the repetitive natures of their work and the high interdependence between different production stages, both of which may cause labour productivities to decrease. With these in mind, it is natural for us to ponder the question: are there “optimal” levels …show more content…
For instance, it might be best for a student body to have 10-12 members working on different jobs¬—one or two leaders, some working on finances and some others working on clerical work—instead of having 30 people responsible for typing, each responsible for one single key, and 50 people responsible for calculating finances, which is obviously too large an extent for division of labour; or having only 2 people responsible for all jobs, which lacks division of labour. However, it should be noted that maximizing labour productivity is not the only goal of division of labour. Multiple “optimal points” for division of labour exist in different contexts. In this paper, division of labour will be roughly divided into four levels—international (geographical), national, industry and firm-specific. Reasons why defining optimal levels of division of labour (other than the labour-productivity-maximizing one) is difficult and unnecessary will be …show more content…
In this case, the optimal level for division of labour exists, though this level does not necessarily equate to the level where labour productivity is at its highest. These optimal levels might be the levels at which contradictions in style are minimised and originalities are maximized. They are, however, rather subjective and vague, hence the difficulties in defining them
Division of Labour—are there “optimal” levels?
In his book An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, Smith (1887) has put forward the argument that division of labour helps improve average labour productivity. It was suggested that a lack of specialization hinders labour productivities. However, over the years, scholars have also found out the limitations of practising division of labour, examples include the decrease of incentives for workers due to the repetitive natures of their work and the high interdependence between different production stages, both of which may cause labour productivities to decrease. With these in mind, it is natural for us to ponder the question: are there “optimal” levels …show more content…
For instance, it might be best for a student body to have 10-12 members working on different jobs¬—one or two leaders, some working on finances and some others working on clerical work—instead of having 30 people responsible for typing, each responsible for one single key, and 50 people responsible for calculating finances, which is obviously too large an extent for division of labour; or having only 2 people responsible for all jobs, which lacks division of labour. However, it should be noted that maximizing labour productivity is not the only goal of division of labour. Multiple “optimal points” for division of labour exist in different contexts. In this paper, division of labour will be roughly divided into four levels—international (geographical), national, industry and firm-specific. Reasons why defining optimal levels of division of labour (other than the labour-productivity-maximizing one) is difficult and unnecessary will be …show more content…
In this case, the optimal level for division of labour exists, though this level does not necessarily equate to the level where labour productivity is at its highest. These optimal levels might be the levels at which contradictions in style are minimised and originalities are maximized. They are, however, rather subjective and vague, hence the difficulties in defining them