The division of labor Smith suffered criticism from Marx in his time already pinpointed the dehumanizing nature of this type of work organization. This division of labor was, for him, directly linked with the very nature of capitalism, based on relations of production characterized by the exploitation of workers. Nowadays, authors neo-Marxian always point the character of workers’ alienation caused by this type of organization that led to parcelling workers and to disqualify.Today, the organization of work (see chapter on Labour Organization core) is characterized by sector or by the continuation of the principles of scientific management, principles tayloro-Fordist (horizontal division and vertical labor, specialization of labor, inventory, assembly line work, many hierarchical levels and marked), or by exceeding these principles and the implementation of new forms of work organization.These are the heart of the debate post-Taylorism or neo-Taylorism? . They are characterized by certain challenges to the horizontal and vertical divisions of labor are visible to the application of the five zeros (see Toyota), a degree of flexibility for workers, encouraging the production demand.
These new organizations can gain self-respect of workers and result mainly by demand pressure, ie by customers and thus rates that remain important.In recent decades, the division of labor may have allowed Smith to analyze the phenomenon of outsourcing between contracting company and subcontractors or suppliers of services to enable early to focus on their heart of business and delegate to others the embodiment of semi-finished products or specific services. Finally, it may also allow analysis of the international division of production processes, leading a company to locate some of these production units in different countries around the world in order to obtain specific advantages.