Industrialization and it Prerequsits

Industrialization is the process by which industry replaces agriculture as the main sector of a society’s economy. It is characterized by large-scale production and the growth of wage labor as the primary form of work. This transformation is usually accompanied by major social and economic changes, including the establishment of effective legal systems, increased agricultural productivity, the spread of scientific and technological knowledge, the development of a disciplined workforce, and significant investment in industry by either private investors or the state. Industrialization first emerged in Britain in the late eighteenth century before spreading to Europe, North America, and Japan. However, its development varied widely, as different countries combined imported industrial practices with their own existing social and economic traditions.

In Stages of Economic Growth: A Non Communist Manifesto (1960), Walt Rostow examines what are „preconditions for take-off“ for industrial development. In the second stage of development, a necessary precondition is for the elite to start initiating innovations in economic activities. A well-educated elite steers the country toward investments in new technology and infrastructure, such as transportation and water supplies. All of this helps build up conditions that would enable countries to take off. In the third or "take-off stage", poor countries begin to reject traditional values ​​and institutions, and people begin to save and invest for future gains. Growth is generated from a small number of economic sectors, such as textiles or manufacturing. These few take-off industries become drivers of growth, while other sectors lag behind and remain dominated by traditional practices. Developed countries should help this process of economic growth in poor countries by financing strategic areas: birth control programs, infrastructure projects (electrification, transport), and the development of new industrial sectors.

Anthony Giddens claims that the most important factors for the development of industrial capitalist society were: the development of administrative power, the creation of an abstract legal system, and the development of a bureaucratic apparatus in charge of tax collection. All three factors first developed within absolutist monarchies, and then expanded and strengthened even more with the advent of capitalism and the international system of nation-states. Wars and preparations for wars between European states have contributed to the concentration of administrative power, fiscal reorganization, and the consolidation of absolutism. The simultaneous development of capitalism, industry, and nation-states, after the fall of absolutism, was supported by the fact that each of these phenomena depended on and strengthened the others, while such development was made possible by a broader geopolitical context, as European states became politically and militarily dominant.

Jack Goldstone, in his book Why Europe? The Rise of the West in World History 1500–1850 (2008) challenges the idea that the origins of industrialization can be attributed solely to capitalism or revolutions. A combination of specific circumstances that existed only in seventeenth- and eighteenth century England – religious tolerance, the advent of Newtonian physics, scientific experimentation, a high level of machine construction and widespread mechanical knowledge, and a social atmosphere that promoted cooperation between artisans, philosophers, and entrepreneurs – enabled industrialization.  

  Social and Cultural Changes Brought by Industrialization

In The Communist Manifesto (1848), Engels argues that the proletariat did not always exist as a class, but appeared with the industrial revolution in the second half of the eighteenth century. The development of capitalist competition and the race for profit, the rise of industrial machines, and the associated division of labor have led to a state in which workers have lost all of the already small autonomy they previously had. Many strata are falling into the proletariat - manufacturing workers, agricultural workers, petty bourgeois, craftsmen, etc. The whole society is divided into two great classes - the proletarians who own only their labor and the great capitalists who own almost all the means of production. The capitalists pay for the work of the proletariat only as much as is sufficient to achieve the minimum of the physical survival of the proletariat. Engels analyzes the key consequences of the development of industrial capitalism. The industrialization and development of international capitalism have led to the fact that the entire planet is connected economically, so the events in the most developed countries have great consequences for all other countries.

The industrial capitalists managed to become the dominant class in the most developed countries, replacing the aristocracy and large landowners from the top. The capitalists secured their power by introducing parliamentary democracy (in which they control parliament), legal equality, and free market principles. The proletarian revolution cannot happen in only one developed capitalist country but must happen in all of them at the same time. As the main instruments by which communism will be realized, Engels singles out: the restriction of private property through high taxes and the prohibition of inheritance; gradual expropriation of private capital; abolition of private banks and centralization of control over money and credit; free education for all children, etc.

Herbert Spencer claims that "industrial type of society" is characterized by voluntary cooperation through trade, decentralization of the administrative system, a democratic and independent governing body, and reduction of political control over personal behavior. In the industrial society, the reputation of the military profession is decreasing, along with the reduction of international hostilities, aggression, and crime in the whole society, while work (earning from one's own work) is beginning to be valued more and more.

Max Weber argues that although the rudiments of bureaucracy appeared with the first civilizations, it was not until the nineteenth century that bureaucratic management spread to all aspects of social life. According to Weber, bureaucracy is the most rational mechanism for governing the state and other organizations and institutions. Bureaucracy enables efficient and systematic management of a large number of people and material resources. This development and expansion of bureaucracy were made possible by the creation of a centralized state, an increase in traffic and communication systems, an increase in the monetary economy, an increase in tax revenues, and the development of industry. The development of bureaucracy is most closely related to the development of a legal-rational type of authority. Within a bureaucratic organization, individuals are connected hierarchically, each position has specific powers and duties, and there are clear relationships of superiority and subordination. There are general formalized rules that all members must strictly follow. The duties and salary of each person are precisely defined, the prospects for progress within the organization are known, and job qualifications are acquired through schooling or special exams. Bureaucracy is guided by instrumental rationality, and its advantages are: predictability, speed, resource savings, and uniformity.

Talcoltt Parsons arugues that, with the transition to modern industrial society, four new types of cultural universals came into being: 1) bureaucratic organization, 2) legal system of generalized universalic norms applicable to the whole society, 3) money and markets based on property and contract, 4) democratic association - universal suffrage, parliamentary assemblies, secret ballot, free elections, political associations and the concept of citizenship. With the evolution of society, cultural and social subsystems become more autonomous and independent of state control.

In his book Social Change in the Industrial Revolution (1959), Neil Smelser sees the industrial revolution as a multidimensional social process involving political, economic, family, cultural, and scientific change. Smelser shows how the modernization of production technology was related to changes in all other areas. He pays special attention to the question of how the factory system in Britain has influenced the change in the family structure and studies the gender division of labor as an independent variable that has affected both the economy and the family.

Ernest Gellner argues that the transformation from the agricultural to the industrial stage was very complicated, so that transformation, once it happens, is transmitted to all other societies through imitation. Nations and nationalism are the product of the enormous structural and cultural changes that have taken place with the development of industrial societies. Social status in industrial societies is associated, most of all, with professional position, unlike earlier societies in which kinship or origin was crucial. In the structural sense, industrial societies are organized according to a complicated division of labor, while cultural unity is achieved through a unique and complicated educational system that achieves standardization of education, as well as through literature that creates language standards for the whole country. This change represents the victory of "high culture" over "lower culture".

Arthur Stinchcombe believes that, in the modern era, with the increase of urbanization, literacy, monetary economy, and economic, social, and political differentiation, comes a need to create organizations that will have specific purposes. These new organizations depended on the cooperation of individuals who did not know each other before, and on the application of new techniques and routines, which would sometimes be specific to only one organization.

Charles Wright Mills, in the book White Collar: The American Middle Classes (1951), attributed the increase in the size of a part of the middle class, the so-called "white collars", to three processes: the growth of bureaucracy in all spheres of work, the development of technology, and the growth of industrial production. Corporations are getting bigger, so former small entrepreneurs are becoming ordinary employees within large companies. The growth of bureaucracy in companies requires the creation of more managerial levels within companies, and these levels are linked into chains of superiority and subordination. At each level, specific coordination and supervision of subordinate employees take place. White-collar workers, unlike experts from earlier periods, do not represent independent professionals but are completely subject to bureaucratic control and manipulation within the companies in which they work. The elite within the state administration pursues policies that suit the economic interests of corporations; the corporate elite finances the political elite, while the military elite depends on the political elite and creates a "military-industrial complex" with the corporate elite. Of these three sectors, the sector of private corporations has the greatest power.

Viviana Zelizer argues that, in the period between 1870 and 1930, the United States underwent a great transformation of the relationship between family and economy. During this period, there were many changes - industrialization, urbanization, and monetization - which led to major changes in the economy and the family. The changes that took place in the family in that period are: loss of economic significance (in terms of earning) of the child for the family, development of the idea of ​​the family as an emotional refuge from the outside world, reduction of inequality between men and women, etc. Her empirical methodology consists, above all, of the analysis of documents: newspaper articles, household manuals, court documents, decisions of tax authorities, and the like.

William Goode, in World Revolution and Family Patterns (1963), presents a large research on the changes in family patterns in fifty societies, over half a century, that happened during the process of industrialization. Using Parsons’s theory, which states that all contemporary societies are merging towards a nuclear family system as the standard, Goode tested the hypothesis that, in fact, family patterns are actually converging. He concluded that change actually happened and that the explanation for this trend is that the modern capitalist system needs a highly mobile and flexible population, and that an isolated nuclear family best fulfills this need.

             Effects of Industry on the Working Class

Friedrich Engels studied the working class in Manchester in the book The Condition of the Working Class in England (1885, in German 1845a). For research purposes, Engels used several different methods of data collection: he surveyed working households in Manchester, used official statistics, studied the reports of parliamentary commissions, interviewed factory inspectors, etc. The period of the middle of the nineteenth century in England was marked by rapid industrialization and a sharp increase in the number of industrial workers, which was especially evident in large industrial cities such as Manchester. The housing situation in that period was very bad in Manchester, and it was especially pronounced among a large number of Irish immigrants. Engels notes that the new industrial cities were built by industrial and financial speculators, with the sole goal of creating as much profit as possible, regardless of the living conditions of those who work and live in those cities.

Engels' research showed that due to industrialization, there was a huge deterioration in the living conditions of workers. Housing conditions were so poor that most working families lived in only one room, in very poor-quality buildings; their clothing and food were in extremely dire condition, and the mortality of children and adults was several times higher than that of the rest of the population; diseases and infections were very widespread; workers did not have access to even the most basic health and educational resources; the average working day lasted twelve hours; even the children did the hardest jobs. Engels noted that industrialization had led to the creation of what he called a "reserve army of labor" made up of unemployed workers. This reserve army of labor grows during periods of economic crisis and decreases during periods of economic growth. The reserve army of labor enables employers to easily find workers in periods when the economy is working well and to easily fire workers when there is a period of crisis. Engels' data indicate that in that period there were over a million and a half people who belonged to the reserve army of labor, who, in order to survive, did the dirtiest jobs (e.g., collecting horse dung on the streets) or begged. Workers also differ from the bourgeoisie in cultural features: they have different dialects, different values ​​, and different social and political attitudes.

Eric Hobsbawm, in his study of Luddites and similar movements and riots that destroyed industrial machines, concluded that this type of protest was not directed at the machines themselves, but at the machines as tools of capitalist exploitation. Since there were no systematic and political ways of protesting, Hobsbawm called these types of protests "collective bargaining by riot." Even when the English Parliament declared the destruction of industrial machines a crime punishable by the death penalty, such protests did not stop.

In his book Class and Class Conflict in Industrial Society (1957), Ralf Dahrendorf concludes that the manual working class was going through the process of increased stratification. The differences in wages, prestige, and job security between unskilled and semi-skilled, on the one hand, and skilled manual workers, on the other, were constantly increasing. This stratification led to a decrease in solidarity within the working class and the emergence of different interests, as skilled workers struggled to maintain their better position. The stratification of the working class and the increase of intergenerational mobility led to a decline in class solidarity and a reduction in class conflicts in society. He believed that the development of trade unions and negotiating and arbitration bodies between workers and employers would lead to the development of industrial democracy and the reduction of class conflicts. In a similar vein, Wilensky argues in The Welfare State and Equality (1975), that the welfare state is an integral part of the "logic of industrialism" because complex societies require modern social benefit systems to ensure a healthy and educated workforce. 

George Friedmann conducted industrial research in many countries, including the USSR. Friedman believed that the rationalization and division of labor, which occurred due to the spread of Taylorism, led to negative consequences. However, he believed that new technologies had emancipatory potential. He later took a pessimistic attitude towards the emancipatory potential of workers, because they became too focused on consumption and leisure.

Nels Anderson, in The Hobo: The Sociology of the Homeless Man  (1923), argues that the period of industrial development that spread from the east to the west of the USA caused the need for occasional and seasonal work, which led to an increase in homelessness because this type of work was neither safe nor sufficient for a normal life. 

Jessie Bernard studied the class structure in the book Social Problems at Midcentury (1957b), where she argues that the need for the industrial economy for a large market has led to an increase in working-class wealth, so wealthier workers are increasingly showing consumer patterns typical to middle classes, such as buying houses and household electrical appliances. That is why she defends the thesis that the middle class absorbed a significant part of the working class.

Harry Braverman is known for his significant work Labor and Monopoly Capital (1974), in which, within the Marxist paradigm, he studies how the work of manual workers has changed since the time of Karl Marx. The main conclusion of his study is that there was a massive decrease in the skills and knowledge of manual workers in the sphere of industrial production in the twentieth century. Such a reduction in the skills and knowledge of workers is not the product of chance, but of the systematic action of the capitalists to weaken the organized labor movement.

The main method by which the deskilling of workers was achieved was by the application of principles of Taylorism, or scientific management. Taylorism, named after its founder Frederick Taylor, is the science of managing someone else's work under capitalism. Taylor wanted to achieve the highest possible productivity of labor by applying scientific methods, and he hoped that everyone, including workers, would see the rationality of his approach. The basic principles of Taylorism are the separation of the work process from the skills of workers, the separation of ideas from execution, and that all mental work should be removed from the plant and concentrated in the planning department, in order to use the knowledge monopoly to control every step of the work process. Craftsmen had great theoretical and technical knowledge in the 18th and 19th centuries, while the application of Taylorism separated skill and knowledge, so the worker stopped being a craftsman and became a living tool of the machine.

Braverman believes that the scientific management movement is of invaluable importance in shaping modern corporations and that it rules the world of production. Experts in human relations and industrial psychology are becoming a service department for the maintenance of human machinery. Taylorism has brought control over workers and the work process to a whole new level. In addition, the increase in productivity achieved by Taylorism did not lead to a proportional increase in wages; on the contrary, there was a reduction in wages. Braverman believes that the loss of control, knowledge, and reduction of wages that workers have experienced is the essence of Taylorism.

E. P. Thompson, in Making of the English Working Class (1963), researches the emergence of the working class in England in the period between 1790 and 1830. He shows how the Industrial Revolution brought declining working conditions and social, political, and religious repression of the working class. In the third and final part of the book, Thompson portrays the responses of the working class to those worsening conditions of life and work. English working class was not simply a “thing” or a structure, but a historical phenomenon created through social relations. The common shared experiences and interests, combined with the class struggle, created the same identity and homogeneous class consciousness in the working-class people. Structures and agency played the same part in the constitution of the English working class. 

The book The Affluent Worker in the Class Structure (1969) presents the results of large empirical research on the rich manual workers in the industrial city of Luton. That study was conducted jointly by Lockwood and John Goldthorpe, Frank Bechhofer, and Jennifer Platt. The authors found that there were big differences between this group of rich workers and traditional manual workers. Traditional workers lived in tightly-knit working communities and worked in traditional industries. They lived in isolation and had a great sense of solidarity and group affiliation, while individualism was rare. They had a fatalistic and passive outlook on life and were focused on the immediate and direct satisfaction of needs. On the other hand, rich workers were characterized by individualism and the instrumental view of work. The same study argues that the rich, individualized instrumentalist worker will replace the proletarian traditionalist. 

In the period from 1927 to 1933, Elton Mayo conducted empirical research at the Western Electric Company factory, which was located in Hawthorne, a suburb of Chicago, so the whole study is known as the "Hawthorne Study". The first part of the study investigated the effects of improving technological working conditions on the productivity of manual workers. Mayo and his colleagues concluded that changing working conditions was not a decisive factor in increasing productivity, but the workers, who were the subject of the study, had a sense of specialness because they had been chosen to be part of the study. The fact that they were elected and given attention gave the workers a sense of group belonging and the impression that they had control over their work.

In the further phase of the research, twenty thousand interviews were conducted with employees of all of the plants of that company. The interviews revealed the existence of great apathy, hostility toward managers, and the existence of informal norms among workers. Mayo used the results and conclusions of this research to study the entire industrial society. He concluded that there is a mass apathy of workers in the industries due to the inhumane management of the workers. He believed that the solution was not only in improving the real position of workers and in more humane relations at work, but also in the global change in the structure of industrial society.

References:

Adams, Roy J., ed. Comparative Industrial Relations: Contemporary Research and Theory (1991);

Baran. The Political Economy of Growth (1957);

Baumol, William J., John C. Panzar, and Robert D. Willig. Contestable Markets and the Theory of Industry

Structure (1982);

Beck. World at Risk (2009);

     -     Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity (1992, in German 1986);

     -     Power in the Global Age (2005, in German 2002);

Bell. The Coming of Post-Industrial Society (1973);

Berg, Ivar. Education and Jobs: The Great Training Robbery (1970);

Blumer. Industrialization as an Agent of Social Change (1990);

Brady, Robert A. Business as a System of Power (1943);

Braverman. Labor and Monopoly Capital (1974);

Burawoy. Manufacturing Consent: Changes in the Labor Process Under Monopoly Capitalism (1979);

     -     The Politics of Production: Factory Regimes Under Capitalism and Socialism (1985);

Burns. The Management of Innovation (1961);

     -     Industrial Man (1969);

Cardoso. Dependency and Development in Latin America (1979, in Portuguese 1970);

Castells. Technopoles of the World: The Making of 21st Century Industrial Complexes (1994);

Chafetz. Sex and Advantage: A Comparative Macro-Structural Theory of Sexual Stratification (1984);

Cole, Robert E. Strategies for Learning: Small Group Activities in American, Japanese, and Swedish Industry (1989);

Coleman, James. The Asymmetric Society (1982);

Commons, John R., et al. History of Labor in the United States (1926, 1935, 1936);

Comte. Introduction to Positive Philosophy, 1988, in French (1830-1842);

     -     System of Positive Polity, 2 vols. (2018, in French 1851-1854);  

Crozier. The Bureaucratic Phenomenon (2017, in French 1963);

Dahrendorf. Class and Conflict in an Industrial Society (2022, in German 1957);

Davies, S., B. Lyons, H. Dixon, and P. Geroski, eds. Economics of Industrial Organisation (1988);

Dunlop, John, et al. Industrialism and Industrial Man Reconsidered (1975);

Durkheim. Division Of Labor In Society (2014, in French 1893);

Ehrenreich. The American Health Empire (1971);

     -     “The Professional-Managerial Class”, in ed. Walker, Pat. Between Labor and Capital (1979);

     -     Women in the Global Factory (1983);

Engels. The Condition of the Working Class in England (1885, in German 1845a);

Frank, Andre Gunder. Capitalism and Underdevelopment in Latin America (1967);

Freeman, Richard B., ed. Working Under Different Rules (1994);

Freyer, Friedmann. Industrial Society: The Emergence of Human Problems of Automation (1955, in French 1946);

     -     The Anatomy of Work: Labor, Leisure and the Implications of Automation (2021, in French 1956);

The Anatomy of Work: the Implications of Specialization (2021, in French 1956);

Galbraith. American Capitalism: The Concept of Countervailing Power (1952);

     -     The New Industrial State (1967);

Gellner, Ernest. Nations and Nationalism (1983);

Gerschenkron, Alexander. Economic Backwardness in Historical Perspective (1962):

Goldthorpe. The Affluent Worker in The Class Structure, 3 vols (1968-1969);

Gouldner. Patterns of Industrial Bureaucracy (1954a); 

     -     Wildcat Strike: A Study in Worker-Management Relationships (1954b);

Hall, Richard. Organizations: Structures, Process and Outcomes (1987);

Harvey. Limits to Capital (1982);

     -     The Urbanization of Capital (1985);

     -     The Condition of Postmodernity (1989);

     -     Spaces of Capital: Towards a Critical Geography (2001);

     -     The New Imperialism (2003); 

     -     A Brief History of Neoliberalism (2005);

     -     Spaces of Global Capitalism: Towards a Theory of Uneven Geographical Development (2006);

Hirschman, Albert O. The Strategy of Economic Development (1958);

Hobsbawm. Industry and Empire (1968);

     -     The Age of Capital: 1848-1875 (1975);

Hobson. The Physiology of Industry: Being an Exposure of Certain Fallacies in Existing Evolution of Modern Capitalism (1894);

     -     The Industrial System: An Inquiry into Earned and Unearned Income (1909);

Homans, George. The Human Group (1950);

Horkheimer. Dialectics of the Enlightenment (1972, in German 1947b);

Inglehart. Culture Shift in Advanced Industrial Society (1990);

Inkeles, Alex. What is Sociology? (1964);

     -     , and David H. Smith. Becoming Modern: Industrial Change in Six Developing Countries (1974);

Jacobs, Jerry. Revolving Doors: Sex Segregation and Women’s Careers (1989);

Jaynes, Gerald David, and Robin M. Williams, Jr., eds. A Common Destiny: Blacks and American Society (1989);

Jencks, Christopher, et al. Who Gets Ahead? Determinants of Economic Success in America (1979);

Kalleberg, Arne, and Ivar Berg. Work and Industry Structures, Markets, and Processes (1987);

Kemp, Tom. Industrialization in Nineteenth-Century Europe (1969);

Kerr, Clark, John T. Dunlop, Fredrick Harbison, and Charles A. Meyers. Industrialization and Industrial

Man (1973);

Krugman, Paul. Toward a Counter-Counter-Revolution in Development Theory. In Proceedings of World Bank Annual Conference on Development Economics (1992);

Kuznets, Simon Smith. Economic Growth and Structure (1965);

Lefebvre. The Urban Revolution (2003, in French1970b);

Lincoln, James R., and Arne L. Kalleberg. Culture, Control and Commitment: A Study of Work Organization and Work Attitude in the U. S. and Japan (1990);

Lockwood. The Blackcoated Worker (1958);

     -     The Affluent Worker in the Class Structure (1969);

Mann. Consciousness and Action among the Western Working Class (1973);

Marx. Capital Vol. 1, 2, & 3: The Only Complete and Unabridged Edition in One Volume (2020, in German 1867, 1885, 1894);

Mayo. The Human Problems of an Industrialized Civilization (1933);

     -     The Social Problems of an Industrialized Civilization (1945);

Mills. New Men of Power (1948);

     -     White Collar: The American Middle Classes (1951);

     -     The Power Elite (1956);

Moore, Barrington. Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy: Lord and Peasant in the Making of the

Modern World (1973);

Neumann, Franz. Behemoth: The Structure and Practice of National Socialism (1942);

O’Toole, James, ed. Work and the Quality of Life: Resource Papers for Work in America (1974);

Parsons. Economy and Society (1956);

Perrow, Charles. Complex Organizations: A Critical Essay (1986);

Pickering, J. F. Industrial Structure and Market Conduct (1974);

Porter, Lyman W., et al. Behavior in Organizations (1975);

Prebisch. The Economic Development of Latin America and Its Principal Problems (1950);

     -     Change and Development (1970); 

     -     New International Economic Order and Cultural Values (1978);

Rostow. The Process of Economic Growth (1952);

     -     The Stages of Economic Growth: A Non Cummunist Manifesto (1960);

     -     Politics and the Stages of Growth (1971);

Rowntree. Industrial Unrest: A Way Out (1922);

Rowthorn, Robert, and Ramana Ramaswarmy. Deindustrialization: Causes and Implications (1997);

Sassen. The Mobility of Capital and Labor: A Study in International Investment and Labor Flow (1988); 

     -     The Global City: New York, London, Tokyo (1991); 

     -     Cities in a World Economy (1994); 

     -     Globalization and its Discontents (1999);

Scherer, Frederic M. Industrial Market Structure and Economic Performance (1970);

Smelser. Economy and Society (1956);

     -     Social Change in the Industrial Revolution: An Application of Theory to the British Cotton Industry (1959);

Spencer, Stinchcombe. Creating Efficient Industrial Administrations (1974);

Stinchcombe, Arthur L. Information and Organization (1990);

Tawney. Religion and the Rise of Capitalism (1926);

Thompson, James D. Organizations in Action (1967);

Touraine. The Post-Industrial Society (1971, in French 1969); 

Veblen. Imperial Germany and the Industrial Revolution (1915);

Wallerstein. The Modern World System, Vol. 3: 1730–1840s (1989);

     -     Historical Capitalism, with Capitalist Civilization (1995);

Warner. Occupational Mobility in American Business and Industry: 1928-1952 (1955);

     -     Big Business Leaders in America (1955);

     -     Industrial Man: Businessmen and Business Organizations (1959);

Webb. History of Trade Unionism  (1894);

     -     Women and the Factory Acts (1896);

     -     Industrial Democracy (1897);

Weber A. Alfred Weber's Theory of the Location of Industries (2019, in German 1909);

 Weber Max. The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism: and Other Writings (2002, in German 1920);

     -     Economy and Society: A New Translation (2019, in German 1922a);

Whyte. Human Relations in the Restaurant Industry (1948);

     -     Pattern for Industrial Peace (1950); 

     -     Money and Motivation: An Analysis of Incentives in Industry (1955);

     -     The Organization Man (1956);

     -     Man and Organization (1959);

     -     Men at Work (1961); 

     -     Action Research for Management (1965);

     -     Organizational Behavior: Theory and Application (1969);

Wilensky. Industrial Society and Social Welfare  (1958);

Wilson, William J. The Truly Disadvantaged: The Inner City, the Underclass and Public Policy (1987);

Zelizer. Pricing the Priceless Child: The Changing Social Value of Children (1985).