ID(25147_2)_How mass production, advertising and marketing, and retailing improvements led both to innovation and conformity

The Role of Mass Production, Advertising and Marketing, and Retailing Improvements in Promoting and Innovation and Conformity in Fashion and Style

Student’s Name

Institutional Affiliation

Professor’s Name

Course

Date

The Role of Mass Production, Advertising and Marketing, and Retailing Improvements in Promoting and Innovation and Conformity in Fashion and Style

Introduction

Economic growth, business values, and partnerships between businesses and the government increased significantly in the 1920s than at any other time in American history (Foner, 2017). For instance, car production tripled during this time and by 1929, more than half of all American households owned cars. The auto industry stimulated the growth of various economic sectors, including the fashion industry. These sectors were characterized by increased mass production, and improved advertising and marketing, and retailing. This paper presents a comprehensive discussion of how mass production, advertising and marketing, and retailing improvements led to motivation and conformity in fashion and style from early 1900s to the late 1950s.

How Mass Production Improvements Led to Innovation and Conformity in Fashion and Style

To begin with, improved mass production led to innovation and conformity in fashion and style from early 1900s to the late 1950s by promoting formation of workers’ unions. Foner (2017) reveals that one of the major development in the mid-1930s was the unionization of millions of workers in in previously non-unionized mass-production industries. Unprecedented militancy in the workplace has been dubbed “labor’s great upheaval.” The Wagner Act of 1935 and the National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA), which gave workers the legal right to form unions, seemed to show the federal government’s support for workers. Also, differences in culture among employees became less of a factor as European immigration dropped quickly. Consequently, new immigrants’ American-born children dominated the workforce. As a result of this upheaval, the AFL’s previous concept of uniting all workers in a given sector (such as steel) rather than organizing them by trade skill had to be rethought. AFL officials refused to create industrial unions in 1935, and John L. Lewis, president of the United Mine Workers, engineered a split that led to the founding of the Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO). On behalf of American workers, Lewis predicted the CIO would gain “economic independence and industrial democracy.” A small CIO union, the United Auto Workers, staged a sit-down strike at a GM facility in Cleveland in December 1936. As the strikes extended to other GM operations in Flint, Michigan, so did the number of workers striking. The governor of Michigan declined to deploy military to break the strike, and the strikers guarded the plants from the police. GM finally gave up and recognized the UAW in February 1937. Ford did not officially recognize the UAW until 1941, by which time it had amassed a membership of several hundred thousand workers. By 1938, unions were established in the steel sector as a result of the car industry’s success. The number of unionized employees had more than doubled from 1930 to 1940, when there were around 9 million members. Unions were able to influence management choices, as well as acquire new grievance and seniority processes, as a result of their efforts (Foner, 2017).

As the workforce in the fashion industry became more diverse due to unionization, this resulted in diversity of ideas and viewpoints which led to creative ideas thus fueling innovation in fashion and style. Also, through diversity in the workforce allowed clothing manufacturers to borrow different ideas from its employees, which in turn promoted innovation in fashion and style. Also, due to cultural differences of the diverse workforce, the clothing manufacturers had to set organizational culture and production standards that all employees had to adhere to in order to work collaboratively and achieve the organizational goals and objectives. This led to conformity in fashion and styles. On a different note, Foner (2017) reveals that campaign for formation of workers’ union was led by socialists and communists with years of experience in organizing. Previously, workers in the American factories would be attacked and dismissed at whim by their managers, who set the length of the workweek and the pace of the assembly lines in American companies. Local governments provided assistance to businesses. Wage increases were not the only thing workers wanted during the Great Depression of the 1930s. They fought for workers’ rights, including the right to picket, pass out information, and convene to discuss problems, as well as an end to employers’ arbitrary restrictions. Union recognition was necessary for all of these. As a result of Franklin D. Roosevelt’s election, those who wished to eliminate “industrial dictatorship” were encouraged. There were more than 2,000 strikes in 1934, including violent, major ones in Toledo, Minneapolis, and San Francisco. Only the massive countrywide textile workers’ strike fell short of its objectives history (Foner, 2017).

How Advertising and Marketing Improvements Led to Innovation and Conformity in Fashion and Style

When consumer goods of different kinds including clothes proliferated, marketing and advertising professionals sought new ways of compelling Americans to buy products (Foner, 2017). The author further adds that advertisers and salespersons marketed different kinds of goods in ways that satisfied the psychological desires and daily needs of customers. By adopting different means of promoting clothing and satisfying the psychological desires and daily needs of customers, marketers and advertisers led to conformity in fashion and design.

Also, marketers and advertisers adopted feminism approach to promote conformity in fashion and style from early 1900s to the late 1950s. Feminists strived to adopt a new conservative atmosphere of the 1920s. Prewar feminism’s focus on personal independence thrived in the growing consumer culture where women’s liberty became a lifestyle pushed by marketers, advertisers, and mass entertainment without any political or social radicalism. This led to the sexual freedom. The new women were symbolized by the young, single flapper who put on short skirts (Foner, 2017). Consequently, this led to innovation and conformity in fashion and style since the clothing manufacturers had to produce clothes that fit the new women. A Japanese artist Kobayakawa Kiyoshi painted a picture in 1930 to showcase the worldwide appeal of the 1920’s new woman.

Furthermore, advertising and marketing led to innovation and conformity in fashion and style through promoting the fifth freedom. When private corporations worked collaboratively to promote patriotism, there was an emphasis on marketers and advertisers definition of freedom. These marketers and advertisers claimed that a fifth freedom, freedom of choice, had been ignored by Roosevelt (Foner, 2017). Marketers and advertisers further urged that consumer goods’ possibilities were endless if freed from government controls. Setting the clothing industry free from government controls promoted innovation and conformity as clothing manufacturers strived to produce new clothe designs without any restrictions.

Lastly, marketers and advertisers led to innovation and conformity in fashion and style by promoting freedom movement. For example, during the boycott’s inaugural protest gathering, King energized his audience by saying that southern blacks were weary of suffering through the dark night of captivity and were reaching out for the dawn of freedom and justice and equality (Foner, 2017). According to the author, freedom here meant many things, although it emphasized most on the economic and political opportunities long deprived the Blacks due to their skin color. Consequently, this allowed the blacks to join the labor market, making it more diverse. Availability of diverse ideas prompted creativity which in turn led to innovation in fashion and design.

How Retailing Improvements Lead to Innovation and Conformity in Fashion and Style

Retailing improvement led to the innovation in the fashion and style since customers would buy clothes and recommend the manufacturers to integrate various designs. As the manufacturers integrated these designs, this led to innovation in fashion and styles. Also, retailers would allow customers to suggest the fabrics that they wanted to be used to make their clothes which led to innovation. Lastly, retailers would request manufactures to make clothes based on the customers preferences which led to conformity in fashion and style.

ConclusionOverall, mass production, advertising and marketing, and retailing improvements contributed significantly in promoting innovation and conformity in fashion and style from early 1900s to the late 1950s. Improved mass production promoted innovation and conformity in fashion and style by promoting the formation of workers’ unions. These unions fought against discrimination in the workplace and allowed the workplaces to becomes more diverse. Diverse ideas from the workers prompted creativity, which in turn fueled innovations in fashion and style. On the other hand, marketing and advertising improvements led to conformity in the fashion and style by adopting different means of promoting clothing and satisfying the psychological desires and daily needs of customers. They also led to innovation by using feminism approach, and by promoting fifth freedom and freedom movement. Due to freedom, blacks were able to join the labor market. They shared creative ideas which led to innovation. Lastly, retailing improvement led to the innovation in the fashion and style since customers would buy clothes and recommend the manufacturers to integrate various designs. Also, retailers would request manufactures to make clothes based on the customers preferences which led to conformity in fashion and style.

References

Foner, E. (2017). Give Me Liberty! An American History: One Volume. WW Norton & Company.