09009621

Critically evaluate the impact of industrial capitalism on the experiences of contemporary work? Reflect on contrasting theoretical lenses by which capitalism can be analysed.

In our society the inevitability of work, the naturalness of business and the realities of employment are rarely discussed, let alone challenged. We tell our selves that this is just the way things are; we look at the world of work and business as if it was something that emerges purely from economic activities alone and has its own internal logic and rationality. (Business in Society [2009], p.1). This essay has been written to see how much impact industrial capitalism has had on societys experience of contemporary work, and will be using various theoretical lenses to help evaluate this. These will be from several perspectives, including; Marxism, Functionalism, Interactionism and Feminism to help give a wide of critique on the question. Sociology is the study of society and helps us to explain human phenomenon using a number of theories and hypothesis, these help to work out why people do things, and in this particular case what happens in the world of business, therefore it is a good measure of how industrial capitalism has effected experiences of contemporary work. Marxism is one of the key sociological approaches when dealing with work, as Karl Marx was an economist. Marx created a social typology in which western societies that preceded industrial production were seen as feudal, and they contrasted with the capitalist societies that most western European countries were in the midnineteenth century, which had evolved into using an industrial mode of production. He categorised capitalism as selfish and greedy, because of the amount of profit made from selling surplus, which meant someone was always losing out, usually the worker who is selling their labour power. From this he established a divide in society

09009621

between two classes; the people who own the means of production (the bourgeoisie) and the people who do not (the proletariat). This can lead to an experience called alienation, Marxs idea that under conditions of un-free labour, such as capitalism, human beings are distanced from the products they produce and the process of making them. Human labour which should be creative and joyful, became a monotonous drudgery (Business in Society [2009], p33). Assembly line production methods meant that the worker had little to no involvement with the end product and in Miriam Glucksmanns study (Women on the line [Cavendish 1982]) of an electrical components factory, some of the workforce did not even know what the parts they were making were used for. Alienation also meant that workers saw each other as rivals and not as a team that co-operates together. Marx said that capitalism was irrational due to its focus on production for profit and not for use, and even though he did agree that capitalism was a logical step in the order of production in history, he said that capitalism and the bourgeoisie were its own grave-diggers (Marx and Engels [1848] 1967:12), and that eventually the proletariat would rise up and give way for a social revolution, eventually resulting in socialism and ultimately leading to a communist state in which wealth is distributed equally. He explained that as capitalism developed, tensions would increase between these two classes, and from this tension there was a development of trade unions to act as a collective voice of the proletariat. Marxs theories are over a hundred years old, but they are still relevant to contemporary society because of the way capitalism is still the largest method of production in the western world, and is only just begun a change from industrial capitalism to post-industrial capitalism due to changes in the way products are being

09009621

manufactured. Most theories of industrial conflict either draw on Marxs thinking or attempt to refute it. Emile Durkheim's sociology is the next in evaluating the impact of industrial capitalism on experience of contemporary work. He agreed with Marx because he thinks the organisation of work and employment is fundamental to the operation of society, and to how we understand it, but only to a certain extent. In his book The Division of Labour in Society (1893) he explains how simple agrarian communities progress into complex industrial societies, however where Marx concentrates on conflict, Durkheim concentrates on consensus. Durkheim said society is based on a shared moral order that creates certain patterns in social action, institutions and culture. He then said at the core of this moral order is the division of labour; the way in which society divides and assigns people to doing particular tasks. Even in relatively small pre-industrial societies there has always been a division of labour according to Durkheim, where each person had a certain job to do. However as the majority of those populations did similar jobs there were very few distinguishing characteristics that helped categorise people, apart from worker and landowner. People in societies like this were bound together by a sense of solidarity which Durkheim called mechanical solidarity because everyone was had very similar jobs and just worked for their own benefit, and had a sort of conscience collective which saw society as the controlling factor over the individual. This is in direct contrast to industrial capitalist societies in which people are delegated specialist roles in the forms of production, and become increasingly specialised as the production process evolves. In this form of complex society Durkheim defined them to have a organic form of solidarity, in which the individuals worked together in specialised roles, and their differences were what made the society so diverse and prosperous. In modern
3

09009621

society's status is attributed by factors such as skill, income and gender. Durkheims view of society said that everything had an obvious function e.g. the education system helps educate and socialise, young people, but sometimes there are less obvious functions for things in society such as playing a sport; this not only integrates individuals into society by making them use teamwork, but also crates a form of solidarity between the individuals involves. Not everything is perfect in functionalist society however, as shown in the concept of anomie. In society there are morals which keep people in check, in fact in modern society it is quite hard to resist such, but sometimes people do resist morality when the connections between the individual and society are stressed. Anomie can be described as a state of normlessness in which individuals are unsure of their role and place within society, which could be applied to the workplace similarly to alienation, where people dont feel part of the business, and therefore become demotivated (often a common dis-economy of scale). Durkheim also described anomie as making peoples desires and aspirations spiral out of control due to the amount of rapid change going on in an industrial capitalist society. He said that from this there should be corporations made in order to set a certain set of rules and values to each occupational group (very similar to medieval guilds), in order for people to avoid experiencing anomie. Functionalism places a heavy emphasis on the role of the economy as an important subsystem of society, and although it doesnt explain the state of conflict and inequality in society as well as Marxism, it is a powerful tool in analysing groups of people and the connection between social roles and the individual, making it an excellent tool for evaluating the impact of industrial capitalism on the experience of contemporary work.
4

09009621

Max Weber is another theorist in which this essay is going use as a theoretical lense on contemporary work. His theory of interpretive sociology can be used in explaining industrial capitalism. Weberian sociology is about meaning for things, seeing people do what they do, and why they do it. It is still one of the most prominent modes of sociological analysis for organizations. In his theory actors attach meaning to their actions, and this meaning is at the very least a contributory factor in the decision. From this Weber determined that human social actions can be broken down into four different types; rational action in relation to a goal, rational action in relation to a value, affective or emotional action and traditional action. Weber does not think these types of action are ideal however; they are as pure as possible within reason (we can imagine what it is, even if it doesnt truly exist). Some actions may be very close to the ideal type, and others might stray quite strongly from it, but these differences allows us to measure between different forms of the same thing in the social world;sociological concepts are often ideal types because of how theory based they are. Rational action is a prime characteristic of the world we live in today, because it is done in relation to goals (zweckrational); economic enterprise is an example of this, as well as control of the state by bureaucracy, participating in a labour market and working for money for a living. Rationalization can also lead to disenchantment and dehumanisation; bureaucracies treat people fairly and equally (to keep a level playing field), but also treat people in an impersonal way, creating lots of red tape (making things harder to do in the first place). Rationalization has been twinned with secularisation because more people were turning their backs on religion in order to turn to the scientific explanations for things, people can no longer do things without good reason to do so. Bureaucracy was a concept that Weber came up with because he believed that businesses would become more and more

09009621

bureaucratized; this organisational form that was most suitable for the pursuit of rational objectives. Bureaucracies are impersonal, so they ensure more equal treatment than patriarchal or paternalist systems which pre-dated them, which before may have just been decisions made on a whim by one person in charge, sometimes in a dictator like manner e.g. Adolph Hitler. An example of bureaucracy effectively in a business would be to ensure equal opportunities when a promotion is at stake e.g. the playing field is made to be level whether you are, black, white, male, female, disabled or able. This makes a huge change from the days in a business in which the people who were promoted were often the bosses golden boys. However the red tape caused by bureaucracy can often lead to a sense of alienation just like Marxs, and can lead to being powerless and lacking control in the workplace, slaves to systems that were originally meant for human benefit. Another of Webers important theories on the development of capitalism is the idea of the Protestant ethic: The idea of work as a calling which was the key motivation for developing capitalist enterprise, rather that spending your wealth on consumption. Overall the Interpretive perspective on society is made up of human action, and within that is social interaction based around struggles for power and status. Underneath that are fundamental structures of decision making such as rationalization, that make us think and act in a particular way. These things come together to make labour markets, legal systems and governments; making it an excellent perspective on the way contemporary work had been affected by the impact of industrial capitalism. Industrial capitalism has had its effects on gender also in the experience of contemporary work. It has meant that a women's status in the economy has
6

09009621

increased hugely, especially since the Sex discrimination act in 1975, which meant that women were guaranteed an equal opportunity as well as pay in the workplace. This is a huge step from the days in which women were discriminated against on a regular basis, and is all a product of industrial capitalism, where even patriarchy can be overcome by the need to make a profit. However the patriarchy is still around and can be seen in cases of women having a glass ceiling on their careers; meaning they can only be successful until a certain point, and even though there is technically nothing to stop them progressing, they do not get promoted due to risks over maternity leave or parenting in general (Cotter, D 2001). To conclude industrial capitalism has had a massive impact on the experience of contemporary work, in fact most of contemporary work today is based upon theories made during the beginning of industrial capitalism. Marx uses class systems and alienation to show that people become separated from each other in capitalism due to the nature of trying to make profit and someone always losing out. Durkheim uses his model of solidarity to explain the evolution from tribal systems in which there was only a small division of labour, to huge complex societies in which there are massive networks of organic solidarity and meritocracy; also including the way in which anomie and rapid change has made our wants and needs spiral out of control. Weber uses his theory of rationalization to explain how in business people are always goal oriented, and that bureaucracies although the most logical form of organisation for a rational system, can often create a lot of red tape and disenchantment for the workers. The impact is almost overwhelming from industrial capitalism, and it would be interesting to see how a post-industrial society progresses, and has its effect on the contemporary workplace of the future, maybe

09009621

even creating a whole string of sociological thought based on organisations and their actors. Word count: 2314

Bibliography

Cavendish, R (1982). Women on the Line. London and Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Erickson, M (2009). Business in Society. Cambridge: Polity Durkheim, E. (1997) The Division of Labor in Society. Trans. Lewis A. Coser. New York: Free Press. Marx, K. and Engels, F. (1848).The Communist Manifesto Cotter, D. (2001). The Glass Ceiling Effect. Available: http://www.bsos.umd.edu/socy/vanneman/papers/CotterHOV01.pdf. Last accessed 11th July.