Sociology of Cultures Final
Popular in Sociology of Cultures
Popular in Sociology
This 39 page Study Guide was uploaded by Taylor Randleman on Saturday January 2, 2016. The Study Guide belongs to Soc 220 at a university taught by Professor Nalkur in Fall 2015. Since its upload, it has received 13 views.
Reviews for Sociology of Cultures Final
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 01/02/16
Durkheimian Approaches I. Durkheim Major theorists: Marx, Weber, Durkheim All are interested in: Where does MEANING (culture) come from? How are culture and social world related? MARX: the Social World causes Culture The type of economic system determines the type of culture you have WEBER: Culture shapes the Social World Ideas (culture) can influence how society (economy and class structure) is shaped DURKHEIM: Culture and Social Solidarity Sees Culture and Social World as complexly intertwined Focused more on: culture as social solidarity Horizontal between creators and receivers A. Overview: Culture and Social Solidarity Collective Representations (culture) Social Solidarity Fundamental question: What holds society together? “Collective representation” is the “glue” of society And this “collective representation” is culture Focused on the similarities and sameness All cultural objects are collective representations But they represent more than “social world” – they represent “social experience” Ie Dooley the unofficial mascot and spirit of Emory Here, Durkheim’s theories bring in “creators” of culture (more than Marx or Weber) Cultural creators are influenced by the social world, which then influences the cultural object (see pp. 5558 in Griswold) Thus, Durkheim’s theories illuminate how culture is created B. Social Solidarity Symbolic meaning theory Trying to understand meaning of supbols Interactions are based on response to symbol The Division of Labor in Society (1893) What holds society together? What are the sources of solidarity in society? What is the glue that keeps it from falling apart? 1. Primitive Societies a. Mechanical Solidarity build experiences around totems organize around emblems, co transitted have meaning to the community members (oscar film community) Society held together by key structural element: “Mechanical Solidarity” Work is very similar for all – involves subsistence tasks e.g., hunting, gathering, building shelters People do similar things in other aspects of life Everyone was responsible for all aspects of ones own life So, everyone’s lives are very similar So, mechanical solidarity is based on the “likeness” of people People had similar beliefs, values, and shared activities The societies were smaller Spent most of the day doing the same things b. Collective Consciousness Solidarity is not just structural Share important cultural element: “Collective Consciousness” common set of beliefs and sentiments Generated within the collectivity Evolves over time Adherents agree on central premises or they are excluded from group Principal repository is in religion sentiments So, social solidarity in primitive societies results from "likeness" and "collective consciousness" 2. Modern Societies a. Characteristics of Modern Society i. Specialization When societies grow in size and density they develop specialization of work and institutions Division of labor in work (specialized tasks) Division of life in institutions (e.g., family, schools, hospitals, church) Everyone has to be connected since everyone has to work together How do they bridge the gap individual consciousness importance of individual growing over time Specialized tasks and activities in daily life: Governed by different norms and values So, many differences among people ii. Personal Consciousness Individual distinctiveness predominates in modern societies Collective consciousness and religion have less influence over individuals’ lives E.g., scientists don’t worry that their discoveries may threaten religious doctrines As Durkheim says: "Each individual is more and more acquiring his own way of thinking and acting, and submits less completely to the common corporate [group] opinion." b. So, what holds societies together? i. Organic Solidarity The key structural element is “organic solidarity” Here, the division of labor is actually what holds society together Individuals (& families) no longer selfsufficient Need each other’s labor to survive Solidarity based on dissimilarity We want to trust each other Society is “organic” because each unit does its specific tasks, but they all combine for the functioning of society Ie: university: the division of labor but all need each other Society is a set of interconnected groups and individuals shaped by morality and a trust ii. Collective Representations What about culture? Over time, both legal and moral rules develop; shared values and beliefs No common religion, but morality/culture collective representations of society Thus, society is a set of interconnected groups and individuals who interact w/ each other to maintain society’s functioning (organic solidarity), and those interactions are shaped by "morality" (culture) the need for these inspires exclusivity all cultural objects are collective representations film example: Oscars brings in ideals of love and morals reaffirming our beleifs winning means that you are a great human being C. Culture as Collective Representation (Modern Societies) Collective Representation: some aspect of society that represents the social experience of the group Groups need collective representations of themselves to inspire unity, solidarity Culture is this collective representation All cultural objects are collective representations: 1. Cultural objects are created by people who are bound to other people (not just individual, isolated geniuses) 2. In these cultural objects, people represent their experiences of social life C. Social Bonds: The Role of Religion EXAMPLE: WAGNERPACIFICI & SCHWARTZ Article on the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Focus on pages: 379382; 385408; 416417 I. Durkheim and Commemoration (p. 379; we will discuss this more in class) Commemoration is about celebrating past victories and successes. Commemoration provides important “social glue” that helps hold society together. Commemoration serves to “revivify the most essential elements of the collective consciousness.” In other words: Commemoration serves to renew a community’s beliefs, its identity, and its unity as a group. It brings us together around time and holds us together around values Represents our beleifs and what we need to value II. WagnerPacifici & Schwartz: The case of “negative commemoration” Not all commemorations are about positive successes. Sometimes societies commemorate a “negative” event: a past event that is controversial/divisive. Problem of genre War was highly controversial and very unsuccessful Dualism between cause and participants Separating between cause and participants Their article has focuses on two broad questions: A. How do societies COMMEMORATE controversial yet important events? B. How do controversial commemorations compare to TYPICAL GENRES? A. How do societies COMMEMORATE CONTROVERSIAL EVENTS? (pp. 379380; pp. 388408) So, what happens when a society is divided over the very event it selects for commemoration (i.e., the Vietnam War)? WagnerPacific & Schwartz show how a commemorative symbol (Vietnam Veterans Memorial) serves as a way to make comprehensible the nation’s conflicting conceptions of itself and it’s past (Vietnam War). Does the commemoration still serve to unify society? Here, the purpose of the commemorative symbol is not showing societal unity/solidarity, but reconciling societal division/conflict. How does commemoration without consensus happen? They illustrate this commemoration process by analyzing 7 stages in the development of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial. B. How do controversial commemorations compare to TYPICAL GENRES? (pp. 381382; pp. 385408) In other words: how does the Vietnam Veterans Memorial compare to the typical genre for commemorating war (the typical “war memorial” genre)? They show how the Vietnam Veterans Memorial compares to other genres throughout their analysis of the 7 stages in the development of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial. III. Seven Stages in the Development of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial***** WagnerPacifici and Schwartz answer questions A. & B. by analyzing 7 stages in the development of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial. (They list these 7 stages in the last paragraph on p. 379 and top of p. 380.) Most of the article is their analyses of these 7 stages. ***Here are the 7 stages, and the sections of the article that correspond with them. The most important ones for our discussion are 36 (highlighted below). Skim the other sections. 1. The Pentagon’s decision to mark the war by an inconspicuous plaque (A Nation’s Gratitude: Search for a Genre, pp. 385388) plaque and display of metals at the tomb of the unnamed soldier underrated 2. Congressional activity culminating in a Vietnam Veterans Week and a series of veterans’ support programs (A Nation’s Gratitude: Search for a Genre, pp. 385388) did not have a physical commemorations, Vietnam veterans week, a moment in time, VA hospitals, social programs 3. A former Vietnam soldier’s conception and promotion of a tangible monument (Entrepreneurs and Sponsors; The Case of Jan Scruggs, pp. 388392) what the memorial is intended to commemorate injured soldier, tries to raise own money to commemorate Ian Scruggs middle ground between living and dead gives legitimacy focus was on thinking about people vs cause Looked at traditional moments with names 4. Intense controversy over the nontraditional monument design selected by the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts (Vision and Revision: From Pure to Mixed Genre, pp. 392396)) development of design, size, 5. Modification of this original design by the incorporation of traditional symbols (Flags and Effigies in the Marking of a Lost War, pp. 396400) 6. The public’s extraordinary and unexpected reaction to the Memorial (The Political Significance of Names, pp. 400402; Uses of Genre: The Enshrinement Process, pp. 402404; Uses of Genre: The Representation of Ambivalence, pp. 404406 Also, first part of Contexts, Constituencies & Meaning, pp. 407408) 7. The ongoing controversy over its further modification (Contexts, Constituencies, and Meaning, pp. 409410) IV. Summary (pp. 416418) The Vietnam Veterans Memorial is developed (and develops meaning) through a complex process of interacting producers, sponsors, and audiences. DEVELOPMENT of the MEMORIAL MEANING OF THE MEMORIAL D. Culture as Collective Representation (Modern Societies) (Elementary Forms of Religious Life) Primitive Societies: Religion as Collective Representation Example: Schwartz article II. Contemporary research: Solidarity & Community A. Symbolic Interaction B. Solidarity and Community 1. Humans are Social (Collective Representation) 2. Distinction between Sacred and Profane 3. Origins of the Sacred in Primitive Societies Example: Home Court Advantage, Mizruchi article 4. Consequences of Religion in Primitive Societies: Social Solidarity/Cohesion 5. Religion and Modern Societies C. Solidarity and Community: empirical research Ritual Disrobement at Mardi Gras (Shrum and Kilburn research) A. Symbolic Interaction Human social interactions create culture Just like Durkheim’s primitive societies created totemic religion in their celebratory gatherings (corroboree) Once created, cultural objects are perpetuated and transmitted through their expression and through the socialization of new group members to their meaning Symbolic Interactionism is interested in the microsettings through which this process happens B. Social Bonds: The Role of Religion Elementary Forms of Religious Life (1912) Griswold summarizes this on pp. 5255 The most fundamental form of “collective consciousness” is religion In order to understand religion, Durkheim focuses on primitive societies: Totemism of Australian aborigines and some Native American groups 1. Humans are Social (Collective Representation) Human beings are “double”: i. Individual biological component ii. Shared social component: social interaction is necessary in order to be human Because we are social beings, all “categories of thought” (ideas, religion) are social Religion: “collective representations which express collective realities” This will be clearer when we look at how this works with the division of sacred and profane 2. Distinction between Sacred and Profane All religions divide the world between the sacred and the profane How does this work? 3. Origins of the Sacred in Primitive Societies a. Collective Effervescence Religion first emerged when humans would occasionally come together in large groups There would be lots of excitement: “collective effervescence” Gathering is emotional, exuberant, full of energy; people feel “carried away” E.g., hunting alone for 4 weeks, and then whole group comes together in wild celebration People began to perceive this “collective effervescence” as a "force" b. The Sacred Furthermore, people give this “force” a special significance They treat it NOT as part of this world, but as “sacred” Sacred as compared to their dull, mundane everyday lives Thus, the distinction between sacred and profane was one of the first mental categories (“categories of thought” in Griswold) c. Totem Now, when people began to form more permanent societies, they still have these times when they all get together and that “force” occurs Such groups represent this "force" with some sort of symbol a "totem" E.g., animal or plant This totem represents the force and it represents the group (clan) d. Religion The group goes on to develop rituals directed towards their totem They develop distinctions between those in the group and those outside the group Thus, flowing from this categorization of sacred and profane is an entire view of the world – a religion Durkheim then claims: When people are worshipping their totem they are actually worshipping their society These totems are merely the material representations of this force that comes about when they all interact Religion is an expression of that society B. Solidarity and Community: empirical research Home Court Advantage Mizruchi article: Local Sports Teams and Celebration of Community Focus on pp. 507511; 516517 1. Background a. Durkheim: Group gatherings generate “collective effervescence” or a “force” “There are occasions when the strengthening and vivifying action of society is especially apparent. In the midst of an assembly animated by a common passion, we become susceptible to acts and sentiments of which we are incapable when reduced to our own forces.” – Durkheim b. Applying Durkheim to this case Sports events provide a forum for “celebration of the local community” Sports teams are symbols of the local community – concrete representations of the community And the “force” that is generated by this celebration of community has an effect on the team’s performance. But not every city or community is the same, nor has same type of home advantage 2. Research Question What factors affect home court advantage? City chracteristics, arena, traditions What gives some teams greater home court advantage? City size (smaller citiers greater home court advantage) suburban areans have less HCA the age of the team traditions celebrations does matter collective effervescence can be measured 3. Methods 23 NBA teams during 19811982 season Dependent variable: Team’s home court advantage (HCA) = ratio of home wins to road wins Independent variables: 1. City characteristics **How does he measure this? 2. Arena characteristics **How does he measure this? 3. Tradition associated with each team **How does he measure this? 4. Results Home court advantage: Home teams win about 6064% of games Home court advantage is significantly influenced by: a. City size b. Suburban arena c. Age of the franchise a. City size: the smaller the city size, the greater the home court advantage ***Why does this lead to better HCA? b. Arenas: suburban arenas have less home court advantage ***Why does this lead to better HCA? c. Age of team: the older the franchise, the greater the HCA ***Why does this lead to better HCA? 5. Summary Sports events provide a forum for celebration of local community. And this “celebration” helps teams perform better. Home “celebration” and advantage are greatest in: Older teams that play in smaller cities, with arenas located in the central city. These teams have a strong tradition, play in a city with intense local identification and pride; and are located in a distinctive central city arena. Thus, we see that social context – here the “force” of the home crowd – has a great influence on human performance! 4. Consequences of Religion in Primitive Societies: Social Solidarity/Cohesion Religion attaches people to the larger group by way of rituals When worshipping the totem, people are worshipping their common bonds And tracing the boundaries of their community Religion is a way of celebrating and affirming of the power of the group This is necessary for social cohesion Moral element, trust, collective representation, give of society cohesion Attaches people to larger group Thus, religion – as collective representation – provides the glue that holds primitive society together 5. Religion and Modern Societies Can religion provide a similar type of solidarity in modern societies? No, not in the same way Modern world is too “secular” – religion has become too divided from rest of life And people are too “individualistic” in their religious beliefs BUT, modern societies develop their own "religious" culture A system of beliefs that: Classifies the world into sacred and profane Involves elements of ritual & effervescence Takes form of “collective representations” These systems of beliefs/culture (in the form of “collective representations”) are the GLUE that holds a society together C. Solidarity and Community: empirical research Ritual Disrobement at Mardi Gras (Shrum & Kilburn) Shrum and Kilburn article: Ritual Disrobement at Mardi Gras: Ceremonial Exchange and Moral Order 1. Background Why would people in US society disrobe in public – as in New Orleans during Mardi Gras? Sacred ritual: special time, special gathering a. Link to Symbolic Interaction The members of the group create symbolic meanings through their interaction Strangers interact with familiarity Elements of ritual that bring people together Social cohesion between strangers ceremonial exhcnage same commitment common moral order b. Applying Durkheim to this case Rituals from ceremonial gatherings are central to social solidarity (or cohesion) They integrate people into the community Reaffirm shared beliefs In modern societies we must establish trust and social cohesion between strangers “…The sacred, according to Durkheim, is found in the emotionalism of collective gatherings. Durkheim’s gatherings, although they generated great emotional energy, did not involve trust among a collection of unrelated strangers, which is recent in human history and difficult to produce.” (Shrum & Kilburn) c. How to establish trust among strangers? “Ceremonial exchange” rituals between strangers show commitment to a common “moral order” Ceremonial Exchange: transactions that occur for symbolic & social ends (cohesion) rather than for utilitarian (economic) ends Moral Order: shared values or world view Ritual Disrobement at Mardi Gras is a “Ceremonial Exchange” ritual A ritual that shows commitment to the “moral order” – commitment to a common values Market paradigm: we are agreeing to the exchange, solidarity around common knowledge d. Methods Observations, 19831996 Videotaping in 1991 (22 videotapes, 36 hours) Specific sites in French Quarter 4 day period: PreLenten interval from Saturday to Fat Tuesday (Mardi Gras) 2. Research Question Why would people in American society disrobe in public like we see in New Orleans during Mardi Gras? Sacred ritual: special time, special gathering Ceremonial exchange rituals affirming some common aspects of our “moral order” or values 3. Results a. How does disrobement occur? Disrobement does not occur randomly. **What are the patterns? **Where does disrobement occur? **How common is disrobement? **Who does the disrobing? b. What is the “exchange” ritual? People are not exchanging nudity for nudity. Rather, there are 2 forms of exchange: i. Disrobement for beads ii. Disrobement for acclaim c. What does the ceremonial exchange mean? What is the “moral order” that these exchanges symbolize? 2 Forms symbolize 2 aspects of our worldview: i. Market paradigm (“Exchange” pp. 43435) ii. Veneration Paradigm (pp. 436444) i. Disrobement for beads: Market Paradigm Disrobement in exchange for beads. – 70% of disrobements were accompanied by throws of beads – Refusals to disrobe were never associated with receipt of beads The Market Paradigm = a social interaction that symbolizes the values of our society’s market economy. **What are the values of our market economy? **How does the ritual symbolize the values of our market economy? **What are the goods or services being exchanged? **What is the “currency”? **How do the results support this interpretation? (See Table 2) ii. Women disrobe for acclaim: Veneration Paradigm Disrobement (women) on balconies for acclaim of street revelers. – Disrobing on the street almost always get beads (82%) – Disrobing on balcony often occurs without exchange for beads (47%) – Rather the exchange is for acclaim (“veneration”) by the crowd “Veneration Paradigm” = a social interaction that symbolizes society’s values of gender relations. **What are the values about gender in U.S.? **How does the ritual symbolize the values of gender in US society? **Who is doing the disrobing in this exchange? **What is the “currency”? **How do the results support this interpretation? (See Table 3) 4. Summary (pp. 445450) The Mardi Gras Ceremonial Exchange Ritual: disrobement for beads or acclaim/veneration This ritual is not about hedonism, or sex, or reciprocal nudity The ceremonial exchange ritual creates solidarity around common values. The ritual symbolizes important values in society: i. Market economy values ii. Gender relation values Participants are creating solidarity among the group by affirming commitment to these common values through the ritual Connection to market principles or “veneration” of women legitimates the disrobement performance. It’s okay to perform (disrobe) if you get beads or veneration in exchange! Finally, there is a sense of the sacred about the ritual that does not go outside this time & context. The ritual and the emotions produced are a temporary sacred time. The Role of Culture in Organizations I. Organizations and Worker Motivation A. Organizational Culture: How organizations motivate workers Motivate: To provide with an incentive; move to action (internal motivation) Want to motivate workers to work towards the goals of the organization How do you get workers to do what you want?? One of the ways we ensure social control Different organizations value different things Boiler room: economic motivators/ incentives, hierarchy, peer respect Puzzle of motivation: what qualifies as Candle puzzle not melt wax on table Use the box, money incentives did not work, extrinsic vs intrinsic motivators What everything is built around Money incentive work in certain social context Conditions affect thinking what is the social context Control: To exercise authoritative or dominating influence over; to direct (external control) 1. Economics – money: Motivate through MONEY a. Economic incentives People want money & things money can buy Thus, will work more for more pay Research on economic incentives Studies on “piecework” (workers’ pay is directly linked to output) A group will establish a “reasonable” rate of production (norm) A rate that most members can achieve without much difficulty Most in group will not produce more Thus, money incentives have limit E.g., Dan Pink – The surprising science of motivation (TED Talk) What qualified as “productivity” in the candle experiment? What were the incentives? What were the conditions under which the incentives worked? What are the most powerful motivators for students? Why? 2. Organizational Culture – values/goals Organizational Culture: “Built from underlying values and beliefs about what is important, valued, and rewarded within an organization.” – Leslie Perlow Motivate through SHARED VALUES/GOALS This larger organizational culture is constructed intentionally (most often by leaders) Create an organizational culture to inspire hard work and commitment to goals of the organization Not explicit rules, as much as implicit commitment through organizational culture. Shared values and shared goals Worker control still happening just not as mean and scary as ben Affleck make you feel guilty about leaving Companies can do this through different methods More decision making ability at lower levels Access to higher levels Indentity bought into the structure Socialization is key Becomes a way of being Stories of the leaders “not a good fit” means its not the cultural aspects value system are in all of these palces to control and motivate people Video: “Inside the Googleplex” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8sOtjBDPQdU – How is hard work inspired at Google? – How is this culture created? There are a few ways that companies do this: a. Structural elements that produce a certain culture b. Culture: Socialization c. Culture: Exemplars and stories Structural elements that produce a certain culture Less hierarchy (fewer hierarchical levels) More decision making ability at lower levels Emphasize informality and accessibility with higher levels **Why would this kind of structure motivate workers? The closer workers are to centers of power… And the more control they have over outcomes… The more they will identify with & contribute to goals of the organization E.g., “High Tech” company has loose hierarchy in order to motivate workers to be creative in inventing new products. Culture: Socialization Workers are actively socialized into the culture of the organization Recruitment – recruit the type of people you think “fit” the company goals Training – instills organizational culture Informal socialization – managers and coworkers socialize new workers Culture: Exemplars and stories Models of commitment to organizational culture Instill organizational loyalty and motivate desired behavior Exemplary actors E.g., employee of the month Organizational stories Anecdotes that illustrate desired values and practices B. Workgroup Culture (Idioculture): Workers’ Response to Organizational Culture “The rules, rituals, and values of the workgroup.” – Diane Vaughn 1. Workers create own idioculture 2. Effects of these idiocultures 3. Example: Fine, National Weather Service II. Organizations and Worker Control A. Bureaucracies and Control B. The Industry of Knowledge Work C. Organizational Culture in Knowledge Industry Example: Perlow, Boundary Control… B. WorkGroup Culture Cultures can emerge at different levels Not always ONE organizational culture 1. Workers create own subculture a. Subculture or “idioculture”: “A system of meaning that arises from and contributes to group dynamics.” (Fine, p.2) – Basically, small group interaction produces culture unique to the group. For organizations: – Level of workgroup (or “shopfloor”): the actual places where work gets done – All workgroups have “local cultures” or idiocultures b. How are these work idiocultures created? Through interaction of group members When people interact on a daily basis: They share experiences, They develop traditions and practices that are unique to the group, Traditions, Practices, Stories Ingroup jokes Technical gossip Celebrations (birthdays, social outings) Stories & anecdotes that show uniqueness of group Nicknames These all characterize the group and differentiate it from similar units. 2. Effects of these smaller idiocultures: a. Relation to larger organizational culture These smaller idiocultures may fit in with larger organizational culture Or they may challenge or offer some resistance to larger organizational culture Cultures of Solidarity and Ambiguity Griswold, pp. 125130 b. Effect on identity of workers This culture affects identity of workers How they view themselves and the group Organizations and Roles Different social context: organization Different status & role: worker In complex societies like ours, with many different social contexts, people develop multiple selves that go along with different roles **Are you the same “self” in class as you are with your friends? c. Effect on the work itself The idioculture of the work group affects the way work is done. Affects the concept of “good work” We’ll see this in the Fine article. 3. Example of idiocultures: Fine article Gary Alan Fine, Shopfloor Cultures: The Idioculture of….Meteorology” Examine ideoculture of work and how it gets done a. Research Question Comparing 2 local offices of the same company, Fine examines: i. What differences in workgroup culture exist among organizations with similar goals? ii. How do idiocultural differences affect: Worker identity The understanding of work Work practices (how work gets done) b. Methods The Research Site 2 local offices of the National Weather Service (NWS): Chicago Flowerland (Belvedere – not really analyzed in this article) Qualitative study Participant Observation: 15 months of observations of the workplaces Interviews: Interviews with 30 workers (total) c. Results i. Idioculture of the Chicago Office A Culture of Science (pp. 410): Chicago Office 1. What is their idioculture? What are its historical roots? What are the important interactions (traditions, practices, stories)? How strong is the idioculture? 2. Effects of the idioculture How does idioculture affect understanding of work? o Key values: Authority and autonomy How is idioculture integral to work identity? o Image as “scientists” ii. Chicago vs Flowerland A Tale of Two Offices (pp. 1014): Chicago vs Flowerland 1. Differences in offices 2. Differences in identity 3. Differences in work practices Chicago: Focus on having fun, pretentious but laid back, put ip warning info later don’t want to be over dramatic, university of Chicago, value certain kind of persona and approach, nerd culture embraced, called each other Dr better image of self Had nicknames for each other, rituals to keep the group combined Authority and autonomy Flowerland: history small Midwestern city, younger new employees, pride in seeing selves a progressive, we know the latest stuff in tune with community, helpful, practical, quicker to accept new tech, needlessly forecast bad weather, when you go to work you product and create a culture d. Summary Comparison of two local offices of the National Weather Service shows: Workgroup cultures can vary a lot, even when work tasks are the same Idiocultures affect both identity and the concept of good work. Idioculture can contribute to work outcomes: o Residents in the two areas are given different advice and warnings as a function of local office culture. 3. Reading Questions: Fine article Gary Alan Fine, Shopfloor Cultures: The Idioculture of….Meteorology” As you read focus on Fine’s results: A Culture of Science (pp. 410): Chicago Office What is the culture like in the Chicago office? Why is it like this? What history/traditions is it tied to? What happened when a new MeteorologistinCharge (MIC) tried to change the culture? What are examples of how this culture plays out in the workplace? A Tale of Two Offices (pp. 1014): Chicago vs Flowerland How does the culture of the Flowerland office differ from Chicago? Why is the culture different? How do the two idiocultures shape the identity of the workers (differences in work identity)? How do the work practices of the two offices (Chicago & Flowerland) differ? How does idiocultures shape the work itself (why the differences in work practices)? Culture and Organizations I. Organizations and Worker Motivation A. Organizational Culture: How organizations motivate workers B. Workgroup Culture (Ideoculture): Workers’ Response to Organizational Culture Example: Fine, National Weather Service II. Organizations and Worker Control A. Bureaucracies and Control B. The Industry of Knowledge Work C. Organizational Culture in Knowledge Industry Example: Perlow, Boundary Control… Boundary control, managers have strategies to make employees stay late hours Make them stay: shadowing, meetings, request to individuals, reviews, internal deadline, job in question, restricting vaca, monitoring standing over, model behavior Acceptors vs resistors, focused on work but restricts work to certain times Accommodating is sacrifices for work Work over everything Spouses can be acceptors and resistors too Find that he doesn’t do his work, accommodates, expects him to be home strains the relationship Acceptor/ Acceptor: careerist Acceptor/ Resistor: compromiser Resistor/ Acceptor: juggler Resistor/ Resistor: rejecter Impose specific demands meeting time, vacation, internal deadlines Monitoring employees, stand over them Acceptors: Work first Accept all demands even if they don’t like it Asked to do the extra tasks more often Spouse Acceptors: Had certain jobs but took over Pick up the slack Mostly women Maintain the household Do lots of things to alleviate pressure on spouse Resistor: Unavailable for certain time periods Resist long hours Draw boundaries Accept not getting the boost Not promoted as often work well enough to keep job No rewards, negative sanctions Spouses Resistors: Set expectations Get angry/ upset Reluctant to do extra Make their opinion known III. Organizations and the Social World (SW=larger structural and cultural systems) A. Background: Fine, Tiny Publics B. Example: Ho, Biographies of Hegemony C. Discussion A. Theoretical Background Fine’s Theory of Group Action and Culture NOTE: Most of the statements in this section are taken directly from: Gary Alan Fine. 2012. Tiny Publics: A Theory of Group Action and Culture. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Definitional Issues Microsociology: Study of individuallevel interactions. Microlevel terms: Individual action; individual interests. Macrosociology: Study of larger social systems, social institutions. Macrolevel terms: Social systems; structural systems; institutions; organizations. Mesolevel of sociology: Study of small groups “where interaction is performed and institutions are inhabited.” (Fine, p. 1) Mesolevel terms: Small groups; local context/environment; idioculture The mesolevel connects micro and macro. Fine’s assumption: society consists of overlapping small group cultures that shape life. Small groups produce their own cultures. These groups often draw on larger cultural and structural systems of society in producing small group culture. In turn, some small group cultures go on to influence larger cultural meanings behind social structural systems. The mesolevel connects micro and macro. Small groups (meso level) are the link between individuals (microlevel) and social systems (macrolevel). They are the arenas where individual actions are shaped (and often constrained). They are the arenas where larger structural systems are enacted. B. Example: Karen Ho Liquidated: An Ethnography of Wall Street (2009 Culture of Wall Street: Smart Ambitious Hardworking Aggressive How is this culture produced? Cultural diamond Smartness how to work into a conversation different types of smartness Different value through cultural capital of working way through their world know what to talk about and how to carry yourself Will learn this form experience and exposure advantage of certain schools over others What effects does this culture have on larger financial institutions?1. Research Questions: Q1 What allows investment bankers to claim smartness? What are the processes through which the claim of "smartness" is constructed? Small group culture Q2 What is meant by smartness in this context? Small group culture Q3 Why do graduates of prestigious colleges prefer to work in Wall Street? Individuals linked to small group culture Q4 What are the implications of this culture for larger contexts – i.e., the Social World? Small group culture influencing larger structural systems 2. Methods: Ethnography Interviews with recruiters (investment bankers who work in Wall Street) and students Participant observation (in recruitment days at Harvard and Princeton) Ho Reading: Discussion Questions: Part 1: 1. The social construction of “smartness” You say it and will believe it Certain mentality Generic sense of impressiveness Eliteness, expertise 2. What allows bankers, Wall Street firms, and consulting companies to claim “smartness”? Web of situated practices and ideologies Coprodided through interactions of multiple institions processes and American cultire Authority and legitimacy It is a currency Driving frce of productive profit acculamtion and global prowess 3. What are kinds of status markers used during recruitment? How is “lifestyle” used in recruitment? You too can have it all 4. What is “the perfect lifestyle?” How is it achieved? Dinners and experiences 5. What is the “halo effect?” Use the brand name of colleges to legitimate themselves and show that they are good Strategic use of elitism 6. How does the recruitment process legitimate Wall Street? Smartness leads to market dominance Smartness and elite pinnacle of status Part 2: 1. How is “elitism” constructed? Basing it off previous things that are considered elite Schools, grades, clothes, activities 2. What do you think the comments regarding Historically Black Colleges are about? They are not considered ranged equally with ivy league schools They don’t have the same level of market savviness and global cosmopolotian nature 3. How does networking work? What is good/bad/ugly about networking? If you know certain people then that will help you Close resources Extention of elitism If they are smart and know you then you must be smart You know people who are up the food chain Cultural capital The good is that certain people will have an easier time but others will have a really hard time because they do not have the cultural capital to succeed Part 3: 1. Do you see Marx, Weber, Durkheim, or Bourdieu’s ideas playing out in this piece? How is the Cultural Diamond relevant here? (think: the cultural object is the worker’s role as investment Social Problems as Cultural Objects I. Events as cultural objects Mass media as ideological vehicle Framing revisited II. Social problems Ex. Binder & Music Lyrics Framing I. Events as Cultural Objects How are “events” cultural objects? Through interpretation Events must be interpreted in certain ways to incite action Cultural Objects & Framing How does mass media guide interpretation? How does mass media serve as an ideological vehicle? Does the media “mirror” what’s out there? o Or does it influence ideologies and way of being? (Remember: Frankfurt School) How does media influence ideologies? o Through framing o Frames: “organize events into recognizable patterns and help individuals understand what actions they can then take in light of these events” (755) Example: Drunk Driving If a drunk driver gets into an accident and kills someone, who is to blame? o The driver who was drinking? o The person who let the driver drink too much? o Alcohol manufacturers? o Should car companies do something to prevent this? Who does our society blame? Who should we blame? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFAvIuAev0&feature=related Cultural object: “drunk driver” o emerges by virtue of holding the individual accountable… o Where have you seen this image? Courts are institutions that reflect our values vehicular manslaughter Blame, individualistic American culture is less about “blaming the system” and more about “blaming the individual” (Griswold, 105) II. Example: Social Problems Social Problems: Problems that cause human suffering universally (violence, hatred, premature death, teenage pregnancy, etc.) Media often define and focus attention on social problems Human suffering Frames: media as influence, journalists provide frames how organizing the piece choosing something and not the others Example: Music Lyrics & Censorship (video clips) Background & The Senate Hearing http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=veoYcsH7Wrs Note: cultural objects and their symbolic meanings What did Dee Snider accuse Tipper Gore of doing? What is doubleentendre? Are artists responsible for “controlling” the kind of messages they disseminate in their art/expression? What is the civic responsibility of the artist? Argument that music insights violence Dee Snider reframing himself A Different Kind of Accountability http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5x_P8GmQK1o Do you think corporations have a social responsibility? Why are they referring to the social context in which lyrics are received? Should the music producers be responsible Draw upon laws and values Freedom of speech values of individiuals what do the frames say about this society Amy Binder: “Media Depictions of Harm in Heavy Metal and Rap Music” 2 defining events that shaped the media discourse of this “social problem”: 1. The senate hearings in 1985 2. Arrests and trials of rap musicians and record storeowners in FL in 1990 Research Question: How are social problems like “explicit lyrics in music” framed by various actors? Methods: Media content analysis: NYTimes, Time Magazine, Reader’s Digest, Newsweek, US News & World Report, Ebony, Jet (19851990) Senate hearing transcripts Results: Frames Observed: Frames against heavy metal and rap: 1. Corruption frame: stated that explicit lyrics have a negative effect on children’s attitudes ruin the youth, afraid of the monsters, innocent children, big bad world 2. Protection frame: argued that parents and other adults must shield America’s youth from offensive lyrics Frames against rap: 1. Danger to Society frame: warned that when lyrics glorify violence, all of society is at risk (vs. just the “individual” or “our families”) glorify values we fear the media brainwashing 2. Threat to Authorities frame: suggested that people in positions of political power felt most threatened by contemporary music F the police, miley cyrus Counterframes: Frames for heavy metal and rap: 1. No Harm frame: argued that lyrics were not harmful to young listeners; claimed that youthful audiences know that the cartoonish lyrics are not meant to be taken seriously the youth get it, not so impressionable 2. Generation Gap frame: points out that vulgarity, parental anxiety, and censorship are all perennial concerns outrage expressed about music lyrics bespeaks a generation gap between parents and their children 3. Freedom of Speech: maintained that labeling albums, printing lyrics on album covers restricted artists’ First Amendment right to freedom of speech want artists to push the envelope get us talking about things we wouldn’t have Frames for rap: 1. Important Message/Art frame: argued against the “harmful” position, asserted that rap lyrics have serious content Resonate allow instituions to make fence All symbolic of greater value system Conclusions: These frames were all resonant because they allowed organizations, institutions, and individuals to understand and make sense of how heavy metal and rap influenced them and others. Resonance occurred through the connection made between these frames presented in the media and the larger cultural frames. ***** Minor Social Problems – How do we know what to do? How do we know how to interpret a situation? How & when do we create rules for them? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ihnwfFxP4Y Culture and Technology I. Communication, Culture, and Community “Ties That Bind are Fraying” II. Tech Change: Oral Cultures to Literacy III. Tech Change: Written to Electronic Media A. Limited Cultural Impact 1. Communities 2. Norms B. Significant Cultural Impact? 1. Cultural and Social Boundaries E.g., Chesley 2. Global Community 3. Receivers as Producers? The Cultural Diamond revisited. A. Limited Cultural Change Technology is still used in a particular social world with particular culture Often, culture and cultural objects don’t change much via the new technology Creators and Receivers create and receive same meanings, just via different technology Electronic Media have not so much changed cultural practices as reproduced and facilitated them 1. Communities 2. Cultural Norms 3. Cultural Identities (tied to norms) 1. Communities Debate: Do Internet Communication Technologies/Electronic Media lead to greater social isolation? Two views: a. Decline of territorial communities and social isolation? b. ICTs expand relational communities (and consequences for territorial communities) a. Decline of territorial communities and social isolation? Two recent research studies i. Robert Putnam: Bowling Alone (2000) Decline in civic engagement in U.S. since 1960’s o E.g., Voter turnout, membership in civic organizations; working for a political party; writing letters to Congress; etc. Decline in “social capital” (social networks) o Decline in facetoface sociability o E.g., friends over for dinner; visit neighbors; picnics; play cards; etc. http://www.bowlingalone.org/data.htm **What do you think of his measures of “social capital”? **Do declines in these activities equate with a loss of social networks? 1 ii. Social Isolation in America (2006) Research Questions: How have core discussion networks changed from 19852004? Methods: 2004 GSS survey data Results (partial): Intimate friendship networks declined drastically among U.S. adults from 19852004 Average number of intimate friendships: 1985: 3 intimate friends 2004: 2 intimate friends “Looking back over the last six months, who are the people with whom you have discussed matters that are important to you?” 1985: 10% said none 2004: 24.6% said none 1 . Proposed explanation: Average Americans more socially isolated because of the Internet and cell phones. ***See Ties That Bind in Contexts*** **Are ICTs to blame for decrease in social networks? b. ICTs Expand Relational Communities Other empirical research ICTs increase relational connections via electronic networks Easier to maintain relational communities i. Example: Fischer: Telephone 18901940 What were the original purposes of this new technology? (Creators’ intentions) To whom did telephone companies advertise their product? In reality, who used the telephone most? How did Receivers use the phone? **Today, are social networking sites playing similar role to telephone – for some generations? 2 ii. PEW Internet and American Life Project (2009) Research Questions: Have social networks (core discussion networks) in the U.S. declined over time? How does use of ICTs relate to size and diversity of social networks? How does use of ICTs relate to inperson social contacts and territorial communities? Methods: Telephone interviews with random sample of U.S. adults (N=2512) in 2008 Results: Social ties over time (Replicated GSS questions used by McPherson et. al., 2004) Average number of intimate friendships: 1985: 3 intimate friends 2004: 2 intimate friends 2008: 2 intimate friends 2 “From time to time, most people discuss important matters with other people. Looking back over the last six months — who are the people with whom you discussed matters that are important to you?” 1985: 10% listed no one 2004: 25% listed no one 2008: 12% listed no one (Internet and cell phone users had slightly lower percentages here.) Yes, decline in close social ties over time. Not as drastic as McPherson et. al. study. But, do ICTs play a major role in this? Internet Use and Social Networks Internet users have core discussion networks that are 15% larger than nonusers Internet users (and those who use a social networking service) have social networks that are about 20% more diverse than nonusers Internet users are 38% less likely to rely exclusively on their spouses/partners as discussion confidants **But are we just observing people who were already more social? (And they just moved online?) Cell Phone Use and Social Networks On average, the size of core discussion networks is 12% larger among cell phone users The diversity of core networks tends to be 25% larger for cell phone users Modes of Contact with Core Network Members On average in a typical year, people have (with core network members): In‐person contact on about 210 days Cell phone contact on 195 days Landline phone contact on 125 days Text‐messaging contact 125 days Email contact 72 days Instant messaging contact 55 days Contact via social networking websites 39 days Contact via letters or cards on 8 days. Internet Use and Interaction with Neighbors General Internet users are no more or less likely than non‐users to know at least some of their neighbors. Users of SNSs are 30% less likely to know at least some neighbors. Internet and cell phone users are as likely as non‐users to talk to their neighbors in‐ person at least once per month. Users of SNSs are 26% less likely to use their neighbors as a source of companionship, but they remain as likely as other people to provide companionship to their neighbors. Summary of ICTs and Communities ICTs expand relational communities Expansion of relational communities does not necessarily equate with shrinking of territorial communities Most research shows that cell phone and Internet use does not lead to smaller social networks Much research shows that general Internet use does not lead to withdrawal from territorial communities Mixed results on how SNSs play a role in territorial communities B. Significant Cultural Change Need more time to assess impact Beginning to see some changes 1. Cultural and Social Boundaries a. Boundary between work and home b. Boundary between private and public 1. Cultural and Social Boundaries a. Boundary between work and home Electronic media have changed everyday life Bringing work into home And home into work o Cell phones – connect both worlds any time, any place o Internet (telecommuting) – literally work at home o Blackberries – workers are expected to be accessible outside work Implications Home is no longer “a haven in a heartless world” Organizational culture becomes even more demanding of worker So, what does this do to traditional gender “domains” of work and home? Boundary between private and public Internet makes information publicly accessible Personal information in a “public space”
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'