Piecework and Assembly Line Industry 2.0


The Second Industrial Revolution started in the 19th century over the discovery of electricity and assembly line production. Henry Ford (1863-1947) procured the idea of mass production from a slaughterhouse in Chicago: The farm animals hung from conveyor belts and each butcher did only a part of the task of butchering the animal. Henry Ford accepted these main beliefs in automobile production and severely changed them in the process. Though, before one station assembled a whole automobile, now the vehicles were made in partial steps on the conveyor belt meaningfully faster and at a lower cost.

assembly line project


The achievements of Industry 1.0 led to a population blast in cities. Many workers now existed to be employed in the gradually rising industry. In the 1830s, the early industrialization of Industry 2.0 started.

The introduction of electricity as a driving force was the preliminary indication for the second industrial revolution. At the end of the 19th century, steam engines were substituted by machines powered by electricity. This development also presented assembly line work. Factory floors could now create a mass of goods in record time.

The assembly line presented in 1913 by Henry Ford in car production was mainly powerful. Each employee did only one manual operation, consequently, the production of individual parts was much faster. Before, a complete car was assembled at one station. From now on, cars were produced in limited steps on the assembly line, and this was much quicker and cheaper. This development was an uprising in the labor market. From this time on, particular workers were wanted. Whether then or now – the lack of skilled workers has at all times been a problem.

Communication on the office factory floor also developed more. This no longer contained letters, but more freshly telephone calls and telegrams that enhanced numerous work processes. Furthermore, the typewriter was extra developed and from now on was also used on a mass scale.

In short, Industry 2.0 saw the start of telecommunications, the assembly line transformed work in factories, and the first automobiles could be produced. Transport similarly developed more as air and sea transport made it likely to travel through continents. Meanwhile that time, Germany developed into one of the major industrial powers in the world. Its achievements revolutionized not only the industry but then many other areas. These growths were the first steps toward globalization – important for us to this day.

Piecework and Assembly Line Industry 2.0

Special effects on the organization of work

The development of mass production changed the organization of work in three vital ways. Primary, tasks were closely subdivided and completed by unskilled or semiskilled workers, for the reason that much of the skill was made into the machine. Additionally, development in the size of manufacturing concerns required the formation of a hierarchy of supervisors and managers. Third, the growing difficulty of operations cheered the employment of managerial-level employees who are dedicated to such areas as accounting, engineering, research and development, human resources, information technology, distribution, marketing, and sales.

Mass production similarly heightened the trend near an international division of labor. The huge scale of the new factories a lot made it inexpensive to import raw materials from one country and produce them in another. All at once, the fullness of domestic markets led to a search for customers foreign. Therefore, some countries converted exporters of raw materials and importers of finished goods, though others did the opposite. In the 1950s and ’60s, some mainly agricultural countries started to manufacture goods. Due to the low skill levels compulsory for assembly-line tasks, inhabitants of any background could work in the new manufacturing sector. The principles of living in emerging countries were so low that wages could be kept underneath those of the industrialized countries. This made the complete production process less costly. Many big manufacturers in the United States and away, therefore, began outsourcing—that is, having parts made or whole products assembled in developing countries. Therefore, developments in these countries have transformed the face of the world economic community.

The superiority of mass production

Scientific management

Frederick W. Taylor (1856–1915) an American industrial engineer led the development of a completely new discipline which is industrial engineering or scientific management. In this method, the managerial functions of planning and coordination were implemented all over the productive process.

Taylor thought that a factory manager’s main goals were to control the best way for the worker to do the job, to deliver good tools and training, and to offer motivations for good performance. Taylor broke down individual jobs into their basic motions, studied these motions to control which were vital, and timed the workers with a stopwatch. With surplus motion removed, the worker, next a machinelike routine, developed much more productive. In some circumstances Taylor suggested a further division of labor, giving some tasks, for example, sharpening tools, to experts.

These studies were completed by two of Taylor’s colleagues in the United States, Frank B. Gilbreth, and Lillian E. Gilbreth, whom several management engineers credit with the invention of motion studies. In 1909 the Gilbreths, studying the job of bricklaying, established that motion was wasted each time a worker reached down to pick up a brick. They planned an adaptable scaffold that removed bent and raced the bricklaying process from 120 bricks per hour to 350. Industrial engineering was finally functional to all elements of factory operation such as layout, materials handling, and product design, in addition to labor operations.

Scientific management theorists expected that workers wanted to be used ably, to do their work with a minimum of strength, and receive more money. They similarly took for granted that workers would submit to the standardization of physical movements and thought processes. The procedures developed from side to side scientific management, though, overlooked human feelings and motivations, leaving the worker displeased with the job. Moreover, some employers applied time-and-motion studies as a means of accelerating the production line and raising productivity levels while still keeping wages down.