The Division of Labour in the New Economy: Looking to the Past for Future Solutions

by Peter Zvalo

The "new economy," driven by increasing automation of virtually every sector of economic activity, has dramatically changed the way work is performed. For knowledge workers — those who describe, compile, validate, illustrate, modify, evaluate, interpret, and communicate data, information, and knowledge — this change has accelerated in the past 15 years.

Spurred by the desire of companies to reduce costs, and enabled by computer technology, the division of responsibility among many knowledge workers has become increasingly blurred. Where organizations once had typing pools, staff members now do their own typing. Where executives once had secretaries to answer phone calls and arrange meetings, they now complete these tasks themselves. Indeed, almost everyone working in an office environment is now expected to do what once was the responsibility of another, dedicated resource.

Nowhere has the situation changed more than for those engaged in the development of documentation. For technical writers of the new century, the ability to write well is only the first requirement on a long list of necessary skills. In addition to writing and editing text, technical writers are frequently expected to develop graphics, design and format documents, and perform other activities that were once the exclusive purview of typesetters, desktop publishers, and graphic designers.

The few support staff (i.e., secretaries, desktop publishers, etc.) that remain are now expected to do more than ever before and be more versatile: they must be proficient in designing and developing presentations, formatting documents for final printing, and manipulating complex computer files.

In short, everyone is expected to have a broad repertoire of skills. The worker whose focus is narrow and who rigidly follows the terms of his or her official job description will probably have a rough road ahead.

This trend is in sharp contrast to the theories held by early thinkers of economics. Since Adam Smith wrote his 1776 landmark work, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, many economists have subscribed to the notion that when labour is specialized, workers can produce a better product much more efficiently. Smith writes: "In a tribe of hunters or shepherds a particular person makes bows and arrows, for example, with more readiness and dexterity than any other. He frequently exchanges them for cattle or venison with his companions; and he finds at last that he can in this manner get more cattle and venison, than if he himself went to the field to catch them. From a regard to his own interest, therefore, the making of bows and arrows grows to be his chief business. Another excels in making the frames and covers of their little huts … (while) a third becomes a smith or brazier; (and) a fourth a tanner or dresser of hides and skins."

Smith observes that "modern-day" (18th century) countries, in which the separation of labour is most pervasive, enjoy the "highest degree of industry and improvement." "What is the work of one man in a rude state of society, [is] generally that of several in an improved one. In every improved society, the farmer is generally nothing but a farmer; the manufacturer, nothing but a manufacturer."

The industrial revolution that followed Smith’s writings exemplified the benefits derived from the division of labour. The advent of the modern assembly line, employing many workers to collectively produce a single product in a highly structured, systematic manner, represented a leap in the efficiency of the production process and enabled the owners of the sprouting factories to reap unprecedented wealth.

The principles behind the division of labour realized by the early industrialists still hold true today. While computer technology has enabled almost anyone to dabble, for example, in graphic design (and even produce respectable results), it is not realistic to expect a novice to produce professional results simply because he or she has the requisite software. Similarly, a skilled graphic designer or desktop publisher is not likely to produce writing of the same calibre as that of an experienced technical writer. But all too often, organizations fail to recognize the inherent skills of each specialty within the communications field, and hope that one individual can be a panacea for meeting all communications requirements.

The results of this approach are increased costs (owing to inefficiencies created by people who are unfamiliar with or inept at doing certain tasks), missed deadlines, and end products of poor quality. When responsibilities are given to individuals with the right skills, documentation development is quicker and more efficient, and generally of superior quality. With the right division of labour, each individual can produce work in his or her area of expertise, and in the process deliver a superior product within less time than if he or she were the sole resource responsible for every aspect of the project. Will companies learn from the lessons of the past to meet the requirements of the future?

Peter Zvalo is a Contributing Editor for Writer’s Block.

NEXT >>