Work Specialization

By Joe Iaconis

Work Specialization

Due to depth of work specialization, we have split the topic into separate posts. This is post number two.  Work specialization is the division of tasks split up throughout an organization.  Without work specialization, the common day organization wouldn’t have different divisions of their labor.  Take for example the automobile industry, and more particularly Ford Motor Company.  Ford has multiple divisions of labor spread out throughout the world.  Some assembly plants assemble their F-150 trucks, while others assemble the Mustang.  While some employees can be transferred between plants, most would be clueless being thrown into an assembly line making a totally different car.  That’s where specialization comes from.  Not only do assembly plants have work specialization; the upper management and headquarters of Ford also have different divisions dealing with work specialization.  The members of the marketing team are most likely only affiliated with the marketing division. Members of the design team are more focused on the design of new concept cars and cars for the future of the business.

“While specialization draws on idiosyncratic knowledge pertaining to the worker’s specific tasks and environment, implicit coordination is based on knowledge common to all workers. Accordingly, the trade-off between specialization and coordination translates into one between idiosyncratic and common knowledge” (Hecker, 2011).  In the article I believe that the main focus was to touch on the fact that work specialization and organizational structure go hand-in-hand.  Without one, the other is useless.  It states that specialization drawn on more a personal and individual level, whereas the structure is based on the combination of all the specializations coming into one to get a project done or keep the company running.  There are some trade-offs when it comes to work specialization.  Some organizations make some of their jobs highly specialized.  According to Organizational Behavior by Colquitt, Lepine and Wesson, organizations with highly specialized jobs can cause a roadblock when it comes to doing business with organizations that do not have the flexibility when it comes to that specialization.  They bring up a great example about the difference between an accounting major who focuses more on taxes as apposed to auditing.  Some future employers might be looking for gradates who specialized more in auditing and not as much in taxes.  Every firm is different and has different expectations for their employees.  The main focus for a student is to try to specialize in as much as you possibly can.  In the long run it may end up giving you the opportunity to become a general manager.  It is better to be specialized in a plethora of things and not have to use one in the job, compared to being under specialized for a job.  I have had more own experiences when it comes to this topic.  I have applied and have been interviewed for different types of internships, and I have been asked if I have had experience with “XYZ” program or something along those lines.  Since I haven’t taken too many upper level courses in college yet I had to reply with “No, I have not” and in the long run it hurt my chances to get the job.  Work specialization can affect your search for a new job as well as the opportunity for a promotion with your current job.

Job satisfaction also plays a role when it comes to the specialization of work and organizational structure.  “The suggestion is that, whereas job specialization may be salient for alienated workers, it is likely to be much more salient for workers committed to middle-class work values.  Thus, job specialization should be more highly related to worker dissatisfaction for committed workers than for alienated workers” (Taveggia, Hedley, 1976).  It becomes more of a personal circumstance in the work place when specialization, and especially over specialization are involved. Not providing a variety in the job proves to be another roadblock in job satisfaction.  Going back to the Ford Motor Company example, doing the same job on an assembly line may become redundant and eventually boring.  When boredom comes into play, it leads to more mistakes and overall unhappy work environments for the rest of the workplace. Most workers prefer a job that has some sort of variety to it to shake thins up a little bit.  I can say from personal experience, I prefer a job that gives me the ability to use my imagination, gives me a little freedom, and isn’t as tightly wound.  I believe this quote sums everything up quite nicely “The more unique the work, the more job security for the employee because if a worker performs well, the company prefers to avoid the costs of hiring and training a replacement. More challenging specialized work may bring in more pay because companies have higher expectations of performance and value the production” (Kokemuller, 2013).

In conclusion, I believe that work specialization is a huge factor in organizational behavior.  Just enough of it in an organization is what every company should strive for.  Nobody wants to be bored with his or her job, but at the same time, they want to be able to have as much information planted in their brains for the specific task or subject that deals with that job.

Hecker, A. (2011). Specialization, implicit coordination and organizational performance: Trading off common and idiosyncratic knowledge. Review of Managerial Science, 5(1), 19-47. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11846-010-0043-4

Kokemuller, N (2013), What Is Work Specialization?. Work.chron.com, http://work.chron.com/work-specialization-4684.html

Thomas C Taveggia, R.Alan Hedley, Job specialization, work values, and worker dissatisfaction, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Volume 9, Issue 3, December 1976, Pages 293-309, ISSN 0001-8791, 10.1016/0001-8791(76)90057-9. (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0001879176900579)