The functionalist theory of stratification

The modern functionalist view of stratification is most closely identified with the work of Kingsley Davis and Wilbert E Moore (1945, 1953). The key to their functionalist theory of stratification is in seeing so­ciety as a system of roles or positions. Inequality or stratification exists in societies because it is built into these roles and into the problem of filling them adequately.

Davis and Moore began by arguing that positions in society differ in the degree to which they are func­tionally important. That is, poor performance in some roles is more damaging co the society than is poor per­formance in some other positions. For example, while it is true that a society engaged in a war requires both soldiers and generals, a general is in a position to make more devastating errors than is any given soldier. Re­member that for every famous general who won a battle that he should have lost there was a general on the other side who lost a battle he should have won.

Some positions are inherently more important to the system, and Davis and Moore argued that some are also inherently more difficult to fill adequately. These positions require qualities that are naturally rare or that require a considerable preliminary investment in time, training, and effort. For example, some positions in a society require occupants with very high intelligence or great tact or other characteristics that are always in short supply in any population. Others—surgeons, for example—also require many years of training. Ex­tensive [raining is always potentially in short supply, for new people constantly must begin training to fill fu­ture needs.

Thus, all societies face a general problem of moti­vation—"to instill in the proper individual the desire to fill certain positions, and, once in these positions, the desire to perform the roles attached to them" (Davis and Moore, 1945). How can this be accomplished? Davis and Moore argued that the only way to produce this kind of motivation is to adjust the reward system. Theirs is a supply-and-demand argument. T5' ensure an adequate supply of the right people, it is necessary to attach higher rewards to the positions that are most important and hardest to fill. Why would anyone want to become a general if the rewards were the same as those of a private?

Furthermore, it isn't enough to find some people who want to be generals: it is also important to attract the right kind of people to the position of general. Stratification therefore, exists because the positions in society differ in their importance to the system and because it is necessary co ensure that competent people fill the most important positions. Indeed, people also vary in their ability to perform important roles. Hence, as Davis and Moore (1945) put it, stratification or social inequality is an unconsciously evolved device by which soci­eties insure that the most important positions are conscientiously tilled by the most qualified persons. Those positions convey the best reward, and hence have the highest rank which a) have the greatest importance for the society and b) require the greatest training or talent. Differential rewards, according to Davis and Moore, prevent less essential or less important positions in society from competing with the more important for scarce talents.