Introduction
Neo-Marxian sociology is the scientific study of social behavior from an examination of the relationship between the society and economy, especially instances where capitalism dominated the economy. In this instance individuals privately controlled the economy by owning industries, trades and the various methods of production in a country. In analyzing this system worldwide it’s seen to break the power of past political opinions, trade and industry kingdoms and scheme resulting to formation of a dominant world. This dominant world comprised of the powerful and mighty in terms of capitalism and the less powerful who were under the control of the powerful world. This theory was put forth by Marx and later advanced by the Neo-Marxian with their main idea being past greediness, form of making and the association among wealth and work. Durkheim was a neo-Marxian and he was involved in the development of the neo-Marxian sociology.
Marxian sociology developed by Marx was more of capitalism, suggesting that powerful individuals were entirely in control and privately owned a country through centralized control. On the other hand Durkheim was a socialist supporter believing that the government was to control and regulate production, trade and industries in a country. Marx’s vision of division of labor was on social classes and status, meaning that people are distributed in a community as per their social status and they succeed according to those classes. This creates inequality with the wealthy gaining more power and wealth and the poor becoming poorer, and naturally remaining as such. Durkheim on the other hand argued that division of labor should be equally distributed among societies to create harmony and equal development. This would only be achievable where a controlling body is in place which sets and maintains social order. To maintain social order people had to come together and build their society from the ancient state to an industrialist state.
Marxian theory generally works on a general level rather than a specific level; it’s seen to consider worldwide production and economy as compeered to the Marx theory which gave comparisons of the same factors on a national level. Argument being that the world systems is as a result of the national and society systems. Capitalism develops form being a society level to national level through use of money, human skills, manufacturing and marketing worldwide. For example the development of the fur industry in Canada which started small and extended supply in the European countries.
Structural Functionalist seems to build society in a certain way in terms of its organs. A society is made up of individuals with different social, tradition and cultural structures. The functionalism of the society depends on these structures making up the society as a whole. In this regard the division of human labor in this context also depends on these structural beings. For a society to function strongly a bond must exist between the society and the structures just like the solidarity referred to by Durkheim in division of labor. For a strong interdependence in a society members must perform different tasks in this context Durkheim argued that a society must stick together through solidarity in order to reach industrialization levels. Durkheim suggested that equality had to be upheld for a society to move forward, in this relation functionalism of all structures have to be upheld to achieve the intended outcome. In building off their work, structural functionalists focuses on all aspects of his structure and applies each in a rational proportionate manner in order to attain the intended outcome. This shows the functions working together and in this sense they are seen to have life since they are well coordinated. Depending with the various functions, individuals are assigned depending on their class, the way he relates with others and his behavior.
Neo-margins differ from structural functionalists in the sense that neo-marxin classed the divisions of labor in a general manner and as being capitalists who aren’t controlled but control the outcome. Capitalists are not more focused on the structure of the organization rather are focused on how the outcome can be achieved. This achievement is the essential factor and to does not matter how the labor is divided and structures established. This is liberal form of structure which offers people freedom to act as they deem necessary as long as they acquire the results expected. This however has the disadvantage of causing conflicts and disagreements especially when there is collision in roles. It also confuses those in management as it becomes complicated to control who is doing in the organization.
On the other hand, structural functionalists are more of socialists who work under control to achieve an outcome. This means that they have established structures in the organizations which guide them in achieving the outcome. This is essential as it ensures guidance to the people who are able to follow the structures established. Most people understand that structures are there to be adhered to which makes it easy to manage. However, this structure can be demolishing and limiting to the people as they are unable to get through the structure without affecting those who have established it. Structural organizations are criticized to be dictatorial in nature which can be boring and demotivating to the people. It is complicated to ensure flexibility and talent development in such people due to their restrictive manner.
Neo-Marxian Sociology being a study of society and economy is just one of the theories put across by scholars to justify on the various forms of production to be followed especially division of labor in driving the economy towards industrialization. Labor division among societies, individuals and nations raises a very important and sensitive topic as to how labor is to be allocated to the various structural and individual beings so as to achieve optimum industrialization and equity. Different people with different views try to put across this issue of labor division.
Conclusion
Division of labor in any organization is a critical factor as it highly affects productivity. This has led to development of both the Structural and Neo Marxism theory to explain how division of labor in different ways in organizations can influence productivity thus affecting economic development. Structural functionalists are controlled by structures established either on the national level, in society or in organizations. This involves a known and well put out structural which all follow. This differs from Neo-Marxian societies which believe in achieving the outcome decided however this is done. The associates are aware of their roles and undergo diverse methods to achieve this. This is very essential within nations in ensuring economic development as people are offered the opportunity of making individual dictions on their roles with one goal.
