Functionalism and stratification
By A. Swaby-Burton, Contributor
WITHIN SOCIOLOGY, the view that stratification is inevitable has always been associated with functionalist theory. A major contribution to debates about stratification came from Kingsley Davis and Wilbert E. Moore. However the roots of the functionalist position can be traced back to Emile Durkheim and Herbert Spencer. Both of them purport that as societies evolve and grow more complex, a greater variety of social roles and functions develop.

In general, the functionalist theory assumes that elements in culture and social structure have effects, or functions, that contribute to the stability and survival of society as a whole. Functionalists, therefore, argue that if stratification is universal, it must have some useful
function in maintaining societies.

Both Kingsley Davis and Wilbert Moore took the above stance, they both contend that some form of stratification is a social necessity. However, in their writings, they emphasise that they are merely trying to explain this situation, not to justify it.

Davis and Moore point out that some social roles require scarce talents or prolonged training. Not everyone can be a doctor, nuclear physicist or lawyer. If a society is to function effectively, it must find some way of attracting to these roles the people who have the talents and skills to play them. For both of the, the roles which require scarce talents, or lengthy training usually involves stress, considerable sacrifice and heavy responsibilities. As such, these roles must therefore offer wealth, power, prestige, or some combination of the three to provide incentives for individuals to take them on. Thus, a society that values, for example, parliamentarians, above the garbage collectors will give higher status and rewards to parliamentarians, or one that values doctors or lawyers above teachers will give them higher status and rewards.

For both Davis and Moore, this unequal distribution of social rewards is functional for society because roles that demand scarce talents are played by the most able individuals. Social stratification according to Moore and Davis is the inevitable result.

The following points below give a summary of Davis and Moore's work. Some principles of stratification. It attempts to set out a model of stratification which:

* Starts from the assumption that a modern industrial society has a range of occupational positions requiring different types and levels of skill for their effective performance.

* Sees some positions as functionally more important than others. The ability to fill these positions is not evenly spread across the population. Even people with the ability require considerable investment of time and effort in training and education.

* Attaches extra rewards and benefits to functionally important positions, to ensure a sufficient labour supply with people being willing to occupy responsible and vital roles.

* Maintains that any society with a complex division of labour needs stratification to ensure that roles are allocated to maximise efficiency and the most important jobs are done by those most able to do them. (Adapted from Success in Sociology ­ Marcus and Durkheim pg. 72).

I do hope you found this explanation of the functionalist perspective on stratification and the comparison of all three perspectives helpful.

Stay in touch for the next lesson as we continue to explore other areas of stratification.