Smith, Adam

Benefits to the Division of Labor

According to Smith, the beneficial effects of the division of labor were evidenced both within particular workplaces and throughout society as a whole. These advantages stemmed primarily from the pronounced increases in worker productivity that the partition or separation of discrete work tasks allowed. To illustrate his point, Smith described how the manufacturing division of labor, itself a logical extension of the broader social division of labor that produced occupational specialization, impacted the process of pin-making. The making of a single pin during the 18th century was differentiated into as many as 18 separate tasks. Some of these included the pulling, straightening, and cutting of wire; others pertained to creating the head of the pin; and still others involved the assembly and packaging of finished pins. A single worker, Smith argued, might struggle to produce about 20 pins a day if he or she were to perform all of these tasks him- or herself. Thus, in a factory of 10 workers, each making complete pins themselves, perhaps 200 would be manufactured daily. In contrast, if these same 10 workers specialized in doing one or two of the distinct operations in pin-making—one pulling and straightening wire all day, another focusing on making heads, and so on—worker productivity would increase exponentially. Indeed, Smith reported observing 10 workers making about 48,000 pins a day, an output approximating nearly 5,000 pins a day for each worker.

Smith attributed the increased productivity that resulted from the division of labor, both within particular workplaces and throughout broader society, to three specific factors. First, by focusing their full attention on a specialized task, individual workers became more skilled and proficient at that specific activity. This enhanced dexterity in turn translated into higher productivity. Smith observed, for example, that young boys who had the sole responsibility of making nails all day nearly tripled the output of a master blacksmith in the same time period. A second causal factor contributing to enhanced productivity pertained to the time saved by workers when they did not have to move from discrete operation to discrete operation. When the division of labor was less elaborated, valuable working time was lost as laborers changed materials, switched tools, or moved from one work station to another. With the manufacturing division of labor in particular, wherein workers might spend the entire day employing the same materials and tools at a single work station, time was saved and output [Page 790]was dramatically increased. Finally, other fruitful consequences of the division of labor that contributed to increased productivity were innovations in the labor process. In devoting their full attention to particular tasks, workers more easily became aware of ways to be more efficient, such as through the development of new machinery or other technological improvements.

...