Social Stratification

It is suggested that the universality of social stratification in complex society, is due to its essential function in social systems to induce people to fill up social positions, owing to the fact that, survival of every given society is based on performing duties of given social positions. Social inequality come forward as means of ensuring that the most qualified fill up social positions that are most functionally important for the society.

The function of Social Stratification is for the most qualified to fill up the most important social position and motivated to take on duties related to the position. The function of social stratification is not the only functional application of social systems; and is limited by other structures and requirements. This includes family institution which limits the vertical mobility through inheritance and succession.

The definition of "social stratification" is "differential ranking of human individuals who compose a given social system and their treatment as superior or inferior relative to one another in certain socially important respects" (Parsons, Analytical Approach to Social Strat,69). The structural-functionalist theorist, believe that society can be subdivided into its various parts: economy, ecology, religion, sexuality, and so on and then be analyzed from the different sections listed. Social inequality plays an important role in the running of our society. "This influential and controversial argument was set forth some fifty years ago by Kingsley Davis and Wilbert Moore(1945)" (Macionis,245).

The structural-functionalist, believe that a society that has unequal rewards will operate more smoothly and make people want to strive to do better things with their lives. Main function of social stratification is that no important social position to leave vacant in both open and closed society. Why would different forms of social limitations, inheriting social positions and closed society shape up if different social positions did not provide different levels of material or symbolic rewards?

Secondary function of social stratification is for the most qualified to fill up social positions. This is particularly true for open and modern society, where education is developed. This works even in closed society in which the high society strives in different ways to promote skills to fill up social positions.

In this respect, the system of social stratification is considered an array where in one extreme stands the ideal type of open social system with everyone having access to equal opportunities. On the other extreme, closed society fill up social positions not through skill or education, rather on privileges. The open contemporary society is balanced in the middle of the array tends to match equal opportunities while embracing social structures. The different type of unequal distribution of material or symbolic rewards is the function of two universal factors:

a) The functional importance of social position
b) Required skill and education to perform duties

Positions ranked on the top, in terms of their most functional importance for the society, require highest education and capability. Nonetheless both factors are involved in classification of positions. How to define the importance of any position? Is waste collector concerned with public health and preventive measures, less significant than physician curing patients? The response is more complex than it appears since there are many variables involved.

Essentially, social positions include series of duties related to specific social function while every position has unique function which makes it important. In fact it is difficult to divide, and measure grades on the importance of various positions.

However there are defining factors:

a) Uniqueness of any given social position
b) The level of dependency of any given social position

In complex societies different structures reformulate the function of religion, politics, economic, and education in a unique fashion which is not easily replaced. The core positions implies to those having highest important function as focal points. The uniqueness of social positions is equivalent to scarcity, education and required skill. The other factor of social classification is therefore the power in form of exercising formal authority. The duty of power position is to undertake decision making, organization and coordination as well as successful leadership of group activities which potentially is in contrast with the interest of subordinates and external social group’s resistance. These are difficult and potentially responsible duties which need specific skills and talents. To this end, filling up these positions require education, need powerful motivation, proper material or non material rewards. Where the authority of a social position is extreme, it is ranked socially as superior.

Social stratification means the systematic and unequal distribution of material and symbolic reward as universal function in all complex societies where no social position left vacant and most qualified fill up social positions. Hence, the unequal distribution of material and symbolic rewards is in accordance with social ranking of social positions. Skills (education and experience) to fulfill duties and authority of social position are two defining factors of social rankings. The assumption about skill as someone capable of acquiring perfect knowledge is highly problematic with regard to education. It is impossible to know whether someone will be capable of successfully acquiring a new skill or qualification through education until an actual attempt is made and later put into practice. The current interest in educational is grounded that, rather than being predicated on a concern for the kind of people we produce, it is based upon a concern with how well the economy does producing goods and services.

Practically all positions, no matter how acquired, require some form of skill or capacity for performance. There are, ultimately, only two ways in which a person's qualifications come about: through inherent capacity or through training. These assumptions explain why the social stratification exists, and define the mechanism of social stratification.

The impact of two defining factors in terms of skill and authority is based on symbolic reward of social positions. The symbolic reward of social positions is formulated into respect assigned by public for the given position. The perception of prestige and evaluation of ranks assigned to social positions is not limited to the scale of scarce resources. In this respect, symbolic reward is measured only by the two principal factors that cause social stratification.

In terms of material rewards, income (particularly in contemporary market economies) is scarce resource, compatible with skill scarcity. In fact, demand and supply mechanism specifies level of material reward distribution. For example, limited number of medical expert, increase level of material reward whereas oversupply decrease it. However, in terms of social respect, the level of prestige will remain the same. The fluctuations of supply and demand curve do not have impact on level of prestige.

The positions of power are less affected by market, since authoritative positions depend on the extent of social activities. However, distribution of middle managers according to the level of management expertise as well as scarcity of managers, to some extent will affect the material rewards. The material reward of higher ranking authoritative positions depends on the political system, whether it is inherited, assigned, or elected by political parties. Personal capabilities, networking and personal influence shape the pattern of social positions. The function of social position can be extended by good performance, or narrowed by weak action.

The main functional necessity explaining the universal presence of stratification is precisely the requirement faced by any society of placing and motivating individuals in the social structure. As a functioning mechanism a society must somehow distribute its members in social positions and induce them to perform the duties of these positions. It must thus concern itself with motivation at two different levels: to instill in the proper individuals the desire to fill certain positions, and, once in these positions, the desire to perform the duties attached to them.

Throughout, it will be necessary to keep in mind one thing-namely, that the discussion relates to the system of positions, not to the individuals occupying those positions. It is one thing to ask why different positions carry different degrees of prestige, and quite another to ask how certain individuals get into those positions. Social stratification, in contrary to other social inequalities, has necessary and sustainable function for the survival of the society. This has substantive legitimacy because collective consensus on occupational prestige requires approval of the society, whereas other social inequalities are not legitimate, encourage hostility, frustration and social conflicts.

Prestige

Occupational prestige is a measure that captures either a relationship of deference or derogation between role incumbents, or the general desirability or goodness of an occupation (Siegel 1971). Prestige is based on the rankings of occupations by survey respondents on the basis of goodness, worth, status, and power, and is a robust measure, showing little variation regardless of how people are asked to rate occupations (Kraus, Schild & Hodge 1978),



Education and rewards

The majority of measures of occupational status are based on some combination of the educational requirements and monetary rewards associated with the position. These include the British Registrar General’s Scale, the Duncan Socioeconomic Index, and United States Census occupation categories. The British Registrar General’s Scale, developed in 1913 by the Registrar General T.H.C. Stevenson and based on a graded hierarchy of occupations ranked by skill, has long been used in British public health surveillance and research. In this schema, occupations are a measure of “standing in the community” or “culture,” and there are five major grades: Social Class I (professional), Social Class II (intermediate), Social Class IIINM (skilled nonmanual), Social Class IIIM (skilled manual), Social Class IV (partly skilled), and Social Class V (unskilled) (Szreter 1984). The British Registrar General’s Scale has proven to be particularly useful in predicting differential risk of morbidity and mortality among employed men (Townsend, Davidson & Whitehead 1990; Marmot, Bobak & Smith 1995).



Ref.:

Mclain, I.,Inquiry into Devolution: inter-institutional relations in the United Kingdom,Oxford University

Kingsley Davis and Wilbert Moore with a response by Melvin Tumin, Classic Readings in Sociology.

John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur, Research Network on Socioeconomic Status and Health

Erikson R. & Goldthorpe, J.H. (1992). The Constant Flux: A Study of Class Mobility in Industrial Societies. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Lynch, P., and B.J. Oelman. (1981). Mortality from coronary heart disease in the British army compared with the civil population. British Medical Journal

Marmot, M., Bobak, M. & Smith, D.G. (1995). Explanations for social inequalities in health. In Society and Health, ed, B. Amick III, S. Levine, A.R. Tarlov, and D. Walsh, Oxford University Press.