For any system to function—that is, to become operational—there are some requirements to be fulfilled. They may be called preconditions. What are they?
A social system consists of interacting individuals. For a system to operate, therefore, it is essential that it have a regular supply of individuals to serve as actors. The first prerequisite for a social system is thus provision of membership. Members are actors who belong to it. Without membership, a social system is only a blueprint. Of course, the system lays down conditions for membership; it spells out in its charter (written or unwritten) who can become a member, and who is not permitted to become one. This is the recruitment dimension. Not only must a system have individuals who are ready to become members, it must also have norms concerning the replacement of members who retire, expire, voluntarily decide to quit, or are rusticated.
Implicit in this is also a condition: the system should ensure that neither the biological organism of its members nor their personality system are adversely affected. In other words, the system’s milieu should be compatible with the functioning of the members as individual beings. A social system has to adapt to provide for the minimum needs of individual actors. To take an example, for a society to exist, it would be necessary that the people constituting it survive—nutrition and physical safety will have to be ensured. Since humans are mortals, a society should have mechanisms for replacing those who die out. Social systems are thus required to address the problems of recruitment and replacement.
Once membership is assured, it is imperative that the system put in mechanisms for keeping members oriented to the system. To quote Parsons, there ‘is the need to secure adequate participation of a sufficient proportion of these actors in the social system, that is, to motivate them adequately to the performances which may be necessary if the social system in question is to persist or develop’. The system should motivate people to become a part of itself, and continue to remain active. Members must also be motivated to act positively to further the cause of the system, fulfilling its expectations. If they become frustrated and engage in disruptive behaviour, the system might collapse, or at least be weakened. In other words, it is important to ensure that there exist among a system’s members a considerable degree of conformity to the goals of the organization, and commitment to fulfilling role expectations.
This would require ‘a minimum of control over potentially disruptive behaviour’, and a system of gratification for actors to keep them motivated.
This aspect has been criticized by some scholars on the grounds that the structural-functional theory is status-quoist. This is, in fact, a misconception. What the theory suggests is that a system would collapse if there is no mechanism of control, or if there is no gratification of the needs of its individual members. There is a hidden message stating that if any one wishes to engineer a demolition of a particular social system, it should attack its gratification system or weaken its control mechanisms. The theory is neutral in this regard, and is capable of explaining the continuance of a system or its downfall. Criminology, for example, will qualify as a science only when it can be used not only by those responsible for maintaining law and order, but also by criminals who want to dodge the system and threaten the populace. Another prerequisite, then, is the proper socialization of the people, so that as actors they can play their roles according to prescribed norms.
Another functional prerequisite relates to the institutionalization of norms within the system. Here, norms mean ways of doing things. Institutionalization is a process through which certain ways of doing things in a given social system find ready acceptance by a large number of its members. Not only are these accepted, but they are also internalized by members as part of their personality system. Norms carry sanctions—rewards and punishments, or systems of gratification and deprivation. Those who follow norms—the institutionalized ways of doing things—are rewarded in a situation of interaction; and those who do not are made to suffer punishment (monetary or physical), withdrawal from interaction (ostracism), adverse commentary, etc. A situation of interaction involves the processes of gratification and deprivation. Thus, norms constitute an important part of the culture of the social system. In fact, it is culture that provides a social system with a distinct identity. And it is culture, that is distinctively human.
There is another prerequisite for the proper functioning of a social system, namely the maintenance of cultural norms. In terms of structure, a family as a social system is the same in all societies; however, what makes an Indian family different from, say, an American family—or within India, a Hindu family from a Muslim family—is the wider culture within which the family functions. A social system has to be compatible with the culture in which it operates. But when it cuts off from mainstream culture and creates its own world by insulating members from the influence of the culture of the wider society, it becomes a deviant or a secessionist group. A gang of dacoits is an example of a deviant social system operating within its own ‘sub-culture’ and posing a threat to the wider society; an example of a secessionist group is that of agitators for Khalistan, who wanted to secede from India and create their own Khalsa land. Such groups face the continual challenge of being wiped out or liquidated by powerful forces of society; however, if the secessionists succeed in their venture, they create an independent society of their own by drawing new boundary lines.
Every system develops a mechanism of social control. However, this is not to suggest that social systems do not provide space for alternatives. Systems allow for orderly change, and all systems gradually move away from the original blueprint. The best simile is the individual himself as a biological being. He grows from a newborn to an adolescent and then an adult, and then finally a senior citizen. Each phase of this change radically alters personality and appearance, and yet these changes occur within the original skeletal frame and without any loss in identity. Structural—functional analysis also focuses on the changes occurring in the system.
Cultural patterns consist of belief systems, systems of expressive symbolism, and systems of value-orientation.
Another prerequisite is the institutional integration of action elements. In order for a system to function, it is necessary that its various parts be well-integrated, and no conflicting demands be made by various sub-systems. Conflicting demands may create confusion and disrupt the smooth functioning of the system. As we have noted earlier, integration implies interconnectedness. Any action in any part of the system has ramifications in every other part.
It is only by virtue of internalization of institutionalized values that a genuine motivational integration of behaviour in the social structure takes place, that the ‘deeper’ layers of motivation become harnessed to the fulfilment of role expectations. It is only when this has taken place to a high degree that it is possible to say that a social system is highly integrated, and that the interest of the collectivity and the private interests of its constituent members can be said to approach coincidence (Parsons, 1952: 42).1
However, it must be said that total integration is an ideal position. In reality, different systems exhibit different degrees of integration, ranging from high to very low.
Parsons has classified institutions into three types as follows (ibid.: 58):
- Relational institutions (defining reciprocal role-expectations independent of interest content).
- Regulative institutions (defining the limits of the legitimacy of ‘private’ interest-pursuit with respect to goals and means).
- Instrumental (integration of private goals with common values, and definition of legitimate means).
- Expressive (regulating permissible expressive actions, situations, persons, occasions, and canons of taste).
- Moral (defining permissible areas of moral responsibility to personal code or sub-collectivity).
- Cultural Institutions (defining obligations to the acceptance of culture patterns—converting private acceptance into institutionalized commitment).
- Cognitive beliefs
- Systems of expressive symbols
- Private moral obligations.
Understood in this sense, institutionalization is the process of integration and interpretation of social and cultural systems.
Leave a Reply