Consolidating all the ideas mentioned above, Parsons talks of four functional problems or requisites, namely (i) Adaptation, (ii) Goal attainment, (iii) Integration, and (iv) Latency2 or Pattern maintenance—abbreviated as the AGIL paradigm.
Parsons subscribes to the view that the action generated within any given social system is in part directed toward its external situation and in part toward its internal situation …. The external-internal dichotomy is one axis. Consistent with his earlier means-ends formulation, he also sees some activity as instrumental in that its product represents the means to a goal, and not the goal itself, whereas the other is consummatory in that the product per se of the activity (or the activity itself) represents goal attainment. The instrumental-consummatory dichotomy is the second axis, which upon intersection with the external-internal axis describes four general areas of activity … (Loomis and Loomis, 1963: 315).3
This is shown in Figure 8.1
Figure 8.1 Parsons’ AGIL Representation
This model was initially proposed for society as a social system. However, since other groups within society are also social systems, the model is equally applicable to them. To quote Parsons: ‘a committee, a work group, or even a family clearly do not constitute in the usual sense, societies. But equally clearly they are, for purposes of sociological theory, social systems’ (1954: 70). Activities occurring in any social system will contribute to each of the four cells in Table 8.1, although its emphasis may lie in one of four categories to justify its primary placement in that cell. Thus, Family as a group falls primarily in the L cell, but also contains all four patterns. As Parsons explicates:
… the differentiation of familial roles by generation is a special case of the external-internal differentiation in its hierarchical version, with the parental generation performing the ‘external roles; differentiation by sex is a special case of the instrumental-consummatory line of differentiation … the masculine role performs … primarily instrumental functions … the feminine … primarily the consummatory … (1959: 9–10).
The four cells are occupied by four Functional sub-systems. Cell A represents the ‘Economy’ dimension; ‘Polity’ belongs to Cell G, where organizations oriented towards the generation and allocation of power—most organs of the government, even banking and corporate aspects of some systems—are placed. Cell I consists of those organizations and sub-systems that perform mainly an integrative function, such as courts (because they are involved in the institutionalization of norms), which are also involved in the task of minimizing conflict, and health institutions (which act to return the sick to a healthy and normal status). Cell L includes those groupings that contribute to pattern maintenance or tension management, such as temples, churches and mosques, schools, family and kinship groups.
As stated earlier, such placement is only analytical. Various groups or sub-systems contribute to the functional imperatives of sub-systems in cells other than those in which they are placed. Moreover, a functioning social system implies boundary interchanges. Thus, none of these cells, or the sub-systems within each of them, is a ‘closed’ system. What happens within each sub-system is affected not only by what happens within that sub-system, but also by what happens elsewhere in the total social system. Actions in the field of polity influences economy, and occurrences in economy influence the polity. The system should motivate people to join it and continue to remain active. People should also be motivated to act positively to further the cause of the system, thereby fulfilling its expectations. If they get frustrated and engage in disruptive behaviour, the system might collapse; or at least be weakened. In other words, it is important to ensure that its members conform to the goals of the organization and remain committed to fulfilling role expectations. The system has mechanisms to promote commitment and ensure conformity. Maintaining law and order is a requisite of all systems; those that fail are the ones that face dissolution.
When the economy is in recession, it significantly affects the functioning of the government. If elections take place at such a time, their outcome is also affected. Similarly, the outcome of elections reflects on the Sensex. Rising religious fundamentalism in a multi-religious society poses a threat to the integration of that society by creating conditions conducive to communal violence, terrorist activities, and even cross-border atrocities.
Analytically separable sub-systems of society, or even a social organization at the level of a sub-system, are thus closely interrelated. This can be diagrammatically shown:
Figure 8.2 Interrelations Between Sub-systems of a Society
Economy and Society, Talcott Parsons and Neil J. Smelser4 demonstrated the interface between economy and other sub-systems of society. Figure 8.3 is very helpful in understanding the linkages between various sub-systems. It focuses particularly on linkages from the vantage point of economy as a primary sub-system:
Figure 8.3 Boundary Interchanges Between the Primary Sub-systems of a Society
‘Since a society is a social system, it has the four problems of pattern maintenance and tension management, adaptation, goal attainment, and integration’ (Johnson, 1960: 57). The functional sub-systems are, however, abstract.
For example, the ‘economy’ is the functional subsystem that deals with the adaptive problem of the society. But this ‘economy’ is not composed of a definite number of groups …. It is not, for example, made up of business firms exclusively; for if we define the economy as the subsystem that produces goods and services … then obviously families also produce goods and services and are thus part of the economy. Moreover, business firms are not exclusively economic organizations, for they also make contributions to the solution of the other three ‘problems’ of society …. The economy is [therefore] the adaptive subsystem of the society in the sense that it produces goods and services that can be used for a wide variety of purposes—purposes of the government, of families, of business organizations, and of groups of other types (ibid.).
The actual social sub-systems are classified in terms of their main contribution to one of the four functional problems, and are called ‘primary’.
It must be noted that this scheme is operative both at the system and the sub-system level. Each sub-system in any of the four cells also has AGIL functions, in the absence of which the system will fail (or cease) to operate.
Functional sub-systems can be distinguished from structural ones. While functional sub-systems are not composed of concrete groups, a structural sub-system is. Family, clans, and neighbourhoods are all examples of structural sub-systems. These structures are characterized by four elements: sub-groups, statuses with various accompanying roles, regulative norms, and cultural values. These structures differ in terms of their size and number of sub-groups, the overlapping of sub-groups, the number of occupants in different status positions, and the distribution of ‘facilities’ and ‘rewards’ among types of sub-groups and various status occupants.
This scheme also insists that sub-systems within a system should not be treated as ‘closed’ systems. If such insular systems survive, they become self-sufficient in themselves and thus secede from the parent system. The creation of the new nation of Pakistan after the partition in 1947 can be regarded as the result of such insulation. Again, the creation of Bangladesh from Pakistan was a clear case of insulation, made possible through geographical separation. The formation of new castes from the original four Varnas is another example of the same process. However, it must be admitted that there can never be total insulation. Every society keeps its apertures open to let in external flows, but guards them well so as not to be overtaken by them. It is on the operation of the twin mechanisms of insulation and apertures (see Atal, 1973) that the integration of a group and its distinct identity depends. In concrete situations, integration is always a matter of degree.
Leave a Reply