Sociological Analysis of Human Social Relations within Corporations - Term Paper Example

? Day Month Year Sociological Analysis of Human Social Relations Within Corporations Introduction During ancient civilization, individuals were largely free to live their own lives. They hunted and gathered their own food, interacted with each other in the way they so desired, and as long as they stayed within the mores of their given society, were able to conduct their own business independently of outside influence. Those days, however, are long gone. Today, society is largely ruled by a corporate culture that dictates how we work and how we interact with each other in a modern economy. Today we know that corporations, for better or for worse, are major influences on our lives. We realize, for example, that of the world’s largest 100 economies, 51 are actually corporations, while only 49 are countries themselves. The question becomes, how did corporations ever get such power in the first place? This paper will analyze the role that large corporations play in society, their influence over our daily lives, and the impact that they have over future generations. Research Questions There are many agents of socialization existent in our world today. Many would argue that media is a primary influencer of young people, while others would argue that traditional value impact the elderly (Wolff 139). These concepts are deep rooted in sociological theory, and well exposed by the great Sociologists of our era such as Durkheim, Marx, and Weber. There are, however, certain institutions that have dramatically influenced modern culture as we know it. The advent of large corporations is one such example of an entity that shapes policy, dictates how people think and make decisions, and can move society in one direction or another as they see fit (Wolff 142). To better narrow down the influence that corporations have over culture and society today, it behooves us to be begin with a series of questions to be answered with supporting sociological thought and theory. What is the significance of corporations to people? How do people relation to corporations in their daily lives? What elements of corporate culture do people prefer the most? Why do people relate so well to and desire to be a part of a corporation? What mechanisms do corporations use to relate to society in general? What role does corporations play in society? Why is it important to think about corporations from a sociological perspective? For this paper, I conducted an analysis of the perception that individual members of society have about corporations. In addition, I observed corporate culture in action in an effort to determine how it shapes the direction that a given society moves. Finally, I talked with employees of the corporation, in addition to consumers of corporate goods. In so doing, the goal was to determine how sociological perspectives work to explain the impact that corporations are having on societies today around the world. I drew upon certain traditional and modern literature from the field of Sociology to make educated inferences and conclusions. The fieldwork methods consisted of participant interaction in a corporate environment that I gained access to by way of invitation from the on-site manager. During my visit, I kept copious notes of everything I observed, including interaction and signage, as well as detailed accounts of any conversations I had. Library Research Component Large entities have influenced group thinking across civilizations since the modern era began. Perhaps it is out of a desire to feel a sense of belongingness, or it is out of a subconscious decision to conform to the actions of others, humans tend to be influenced by the actions of others, whether than the desire of the self in many situations. We are inundated with corporate messages from corporations on a daily basis. In addition, most individuals frequent a corporate location on a near daily basis, thereby becoming a part of the corporate culture whether they like it or not. In addition, the messages we receive from these large entities begin early in life and continue throughout our lifespan. Kilbourne (1999) notes that the United States is one of the few countries in the industrialized word that seems to permit, and even embrace, advertising to children (96). This demonstrates the power the corporations have over not only governmental agencies who regulate advertising and the media, but all the influence that such entities begin to exert in the lives of young people. In essence, we have become a society that largely follows the newest and latest fashion. In our desire to keep up with others, we have forsaken individual thought, and substituted it with a collective group think mentality that allows corporations to move us in the direction they deem to best fit the times (Weyher 342). This can be for political, ideological, or economic gain. In essence, humans have become a pawn in society and corporations are the chessboards. Durkheim himself explored concepts similar to this in his work on collective actions. While he did not advocate collective memory per say, he did discuss in detail his belief that collective groups tend to form certain rituals and traditions together. We form memories, both good and bad, that play an important role in our decision making process. Corporations, because of their influence over our lives, afford us the opportunity to collectively work together and act in a similar manner that permits society to keep progressing and functioning in a forward moving and, hopefully, positive direction (Misztal 124). The primary question becomes how corporations came to have this level of influence over our lives in the first place. Durkheim’s work in this area is actually quite feeling. Overtime, individuals in any given society begin to think collectively. They develop certain values, ways of thinking, and methods of interaction with one another that are passed from one generation to another (Misztal 128). This type of collective memory, according to common sociological theory, began in areas of religion and cultural tradition. Corporations, however, are largely responsible for the secularization of American society (Misztal 130). This should not be viewed negatively, but rather from the perspective of explaining how large businesses has risen to the prominent place in society that they are today. In generations past, the church or community elders were largely responsible for directing society in the direction they wanted to head. When the leader of a religious organization, or a community, spoke, most people heeded the words said and the advice given. The pulpit and the community center have not largely been replaced with mass advertising campaigns and the corporate boardroom. Whereas families used to often work together, attend church together, and eat together, today is much different. Parents often spend more time at work than they do at home, children are being influenced by corporate messages from every direction, and the sense of community in many cities is slowly drifting away (Van de Walle 38). Even Marx himself began to theorize about this in his work on the capitalistic mindset. Advocating the position that capitalism constituted a ‘dictatorship the bourgeoisie’, Marx firmly believed that society was run by a series of wealthy individuals or institutions. The wealthy class, according to Marxism, creates rules and policies and largely governs for their own benefit (Bond 138). While not agreeing with Marx in the sense that capitalism is altogether an evil entity, his theory does have some interesting points about our modern day society and how we are largely guided in our decision making process by forces, both seen and unseen, that captivate our attention on a daily basis. This paper is not an expose calling for a class war. Rather it is an attempt to answer the simple question of how corporations have come to their current position of power over our lives. The theories of Marx and Weber, among others, truly demonstrate just how much influence these companies have over us. The working class, for example, is largely dominated by a corporate culture that tells us when to go to work, what we are to do while we there, and when we can go home (Bond 140). Balance that with people in positions of wealth and power who are seen on the golf course, jetting off to distant lands in their private jet, or enjoy a luxurious spa vacation with their significant other and it is not difficult to picture exactly what Marx was referring to in his communist manifesto. When individuals are controlled by another person, or by a corporation, they become a product of the society that is dictated to them (Bond 142). Kilbourne describes this phenomenon by relating a story of ridicule and scorn when a high school student refused to conform. He wore a Pepsi shirt to school on a school sponsored Coke day (Kilbourne 97). Apparently Coke had designed a competition to award cash to the school that promoted their product the most. In droves, kids rushed to advertise a product that some of them may not even use, simply because ‘everyone else was doing it’. Coca-Cola is one of the largest companies in the world. It is said that no matter where you on any of the six populated continents, a Coke product is not ever far away (Kilbourne 97). This certainly begins to answer the research question presented in this paper. Advertising by large corporations has slowly socialized and conditioned much of society into acting a certain way and performing activities that we might not even enjoy simply out of a desire to conform. The desire to conform is what keeps society separate by classes. Wealthy institutions, such as corporations, have a way of getting society to conform to their way of thinking (Bond 142). By keeping society divided into a series of distinct classes, the individuals at the top and wield influence over individuals at the bottom. Those individuals in lower classes may not even realize the power that corporations truly have over the daily decision-making. A person goes to the store, for example, not to buy candy, but to buy laundry detergent. Because of the mass advertising they have been exposed to on television, they enter the store, see a candy display, and they immediately feel they must conform to the messages they have heard and seen (Kilbourne 98). It seems to be in our DNA to let corporations tell us what to eat and where to shop. It did not used to be this way. In the early days of our country, before Marx discovered his idea about class conflict, society was largely communal. Families worked together, ate together, and shopped together. Corporations were largely unheard of. Farms, for example, were family run and the neighborhood drug store was, well, just that - a neighborhood store. There would even be a soda fountain in the store where families and friends could meet together and socialize after school or work, or on the weekends. Corporate influence was virtually nonexistent. Towards the middle part of the 20th century, if not before, this all began to change. Larger companies pushed out the family farm. They now determine what is grown and how it is grown. Families do not have a say, for the most part, about who grows their food and how. It was largely determined for us when corporations took over control of farms and most meat packing industries. Large conglomerates that seem to sell only products that appeal to their bottom line have largely replaced the neighborhood store concept. The interest, as Marx would say, is not on serving the lower class with quality products, but rather on serving the wealthy class by leading others in society to succumb to purchasing products and services that they do not need (Nelson 398). In addition to advertising goods and services, corporate culture has invaded our social environment as well. Even Max Weber, considered to be right there with Durkheim and Marx as the three founding fathers of Sociology, focused on economic principles in his discussion of what made society function as a cohesive unit (Calhoun 2002). Weber’s work on social stratification is particularly telling. He found that “Social class is based on economically determined relationships to the market”, which consists of the roles of owner, renter, employee, and others (Calhoun 2002). As such, individuals within society tend to fall into one of these roles. Unless one happens to be a member of the upper class, they will likely follow those ahead of them. Even during the era that Weber did much of his theoretical work, the early 1900’s; he began to note that Western society was shifting. He began to notice stark differences in the way we interact with one another than, for example, please in Asiatic cultures (Calhoun 2002). This was particularly telling because he noticed a shift away from religious and traditional principles that had guided us for so many years into more of a secularist point of view. He agreed with Marx that the bourgeois among us ruled Capitalism, the primary of which today is large corporations (Allan 2005). Weber proposed many ideas about economic values and how they dictate a societies mores and core ways of thinking. He proposed the Marginal Theory of Value that drew a parallel between psychology, sociology and economics that helps to explain a plausible answer to our particular research question. For decades, society has placed a great value on certain goods and services when compared to another. While some would argue that this is simple supply and demand, others would contend that corporations and wealthy individuals themselves are the primary benefactors of this price manipulation (Allan 2005). Consider diamonds. There is a plethora of diamonds available in the world, yet only the very wealthy can afford the truly ‘big’ diamonds. Others in society are left to fight for what’s left at a price that they can afford, which is truly probably over market value to begin with. By manipulating the prices of certain goods and services, the Marginal Theory of Value begins to shed some light on the simple notion that social stratification truly does exist in our society (Allan 2005). The gap between the have’s and the have not’s has grown so large that corporations are left reaping the profits of societies desire to keep up with one another (Ritzer 2009). Ethnographic Fieldwork Component In the ethnography portion of this study, I explore and analyze the various ways in which corporations impact society. Through a series of observations interviews, I seek to interpret the feelings that we have such businesses, both the positive and the negative, in an effort to better understand how society functions in the context of large corporations being at the helm in nearly locality in the country. In what ways would society be better off if corporations did not exist? What would society look like if that were not the case? Would society actually move backwards if corporations did not play the integral part they do today? How do large corporations form the foundation for many of our daily decisions and how do they shape government policy? These are just a few of the thoughts that went through my head as I prepared for the actual task of conducting fieldwork. Over a two-week time span during this current term, I conducted person interviews and observations in four different corporate environments. Most of the people I interviewed were either college students or working adults. This demographic is useful to this particular study because the members would be the ones that are most impacted by corporations. Much of this age group is comprised of individuals that work in the corporate environment daily, or come into contact with some form of corporate entity in the everyday life. The ages of the participants in this field study ranges from 19 to 52 years old, with the average age of the interviewed participants being 28. The locations chosen for the observations and interviews were all in a relatively racially balanced area of the community, so there was a decent balance of ethnicities involved in the study. While 50% were white, about 30% were African-American, with the remainder being other minority groups, the most significant being Hispanic. The ethnic backgrounds encountered during this study helped me to solidify the role that corporations play in society. Our culture does not only consist of one race, but rather is comprised of many races and backgrounds, all trying to make their place in the world. Each are impacted in some way by corporations, and it was quite fascinating to consider the different ways in which this occurs. For example, I discovered that Hispanics are less likely to work for corporations and they tend to frequent smaller, family run businesses. In this respect, many of their decisions are made based on traditional values. Caucasians and African-Americans that were interviewed, however, tended to not only work in a large corporate environment, but they indicated that they heavily influenced their buying decisions as well. In preparing the theoretical framework for this paper, it was important to observe corporate culture in action. This consisted of two stages: Observation and personal conversations. I observed four separate mega corporate supermarkets on several different occasions. Each visit lasted one hour. During the visit, I observed the shopping patterns of customers and how they seemed to be influenced in their purchasing decisions. In addition, I took notes in an attempt to draw a parallel between what was individual freedom in decision-making and what appeared to be decisions that were directed by corporate influence. These notes were used to formulate must of the background for the library research part of the paper that preceded this particular section. In addition to observation, I talked with a few people from the following demographics: College aged students, middle-aged consumers, and employees in the organization. I asked variations of the questions contained earlier in this paper in an effort to gauge corporate influence over the lives of people. The results, while largely expected, were quite telling. People were generally willing to indicate short answers to my survey, and many were able to express themselves in more detail. In addition, the observation portion of the exercise enabled me to look at different patterns that might be existent. In the end, it was also beneficial to get a feel as to why individuals tended to navigate towards a corporate entity, rather than to the relatively more intimate confines of a neighborhood store. Whenever corporations are studied, the fieldwork often reverts to a determination of how big business has impacted the small, family owned firms that were so prevalent in the early part of this decade. In addition, one must consider how everyday decisions are often made for us, particularly if we work in such an environment. Our lives can quickly become consumed with thoughts of the corporation that we often find ourselves thinking like the organization, rather than analytically deciding and making choices for ourselves. College students, therefore, provided much information for this ethnography, as they are on the cusp of forming new generational ideals that will either strengthen or weaken the place that corporations currently hold in society. College students were observed to buy cheaper items than other consumers, yet they still preferred name brands. This information can be used to infer that corporations, who are the producers of such name brands, lead people to believe that their products are truly superior. In addition, in asking this age group why they purchased the products they did, the responses were something along the line of that is what their friends buy. Continuing the conversation, it was discovered that purchasing decisions were largely based on advertising products and not really on any other type of preference for one product over another. Middle-aged consumers appeared to be even more influenced by the corporate culture. They typically spent less time looking for bargains and navigated towards special displays that seemed to make their shopping experience easier. One person I spoke with this had this to say about the influence that corporations have over people: “Now that I think about it, I suppose corporations dictate much of how we live. I do not much control over what I buy - I am limited by the choices that the stores put in front of me. Likely these are the products that make them the most money. In addition, corporations heavily influence me because I have not other choice. I remember when we used to shop at neighborhood stores we called ‘mom and pop’ shops. These were largely family run businesses that held some societal values. These large corporations have now mostly replaced those stores and I wonder who is watching out for our interests now? Thanks for asking these questions - it has actually allowed me to ponder who is influencing my daily decisions. It is certainly something to consider”. This was a great response that an individual that seemed genuinely interested in the topic we are discussing. In the end, his response was indicative of the reality that corporations have captivated the collective mind of society. Whether or not this is a positive or negative occurrence, I suppose, is a topic for another paper. Finally, the value of observing employees of a corporation was not as valuable as actually talking to them. In Western society, we already understand that employees do what their superiors tell them do, or they suffer consequences, such as the loss of a job. With that reality firmly planted already, I focused a few questions on the influence that the corporation as a whole has over their lives. Overwhelmingly, the six people I talked to said their job actually defined who they were as an individual, for better or for worse. The comments exposed the fact that work is rarely left at ‘work’. It pervades the mindset of the employee at home in the evenings and on the weekends. It forms a basis for many social conversations and, in fact, most of the employees I talked to said many of their acquaintances outside of work come from their job itself. This tells us that corporations have instilled in us a sense of loyalty. Marx mentions this in his theory. Instead of companies feeling a sense of devotion to employees, society seems to have shifted that way of thinking into employees feeling that they owe their company something (Nelson 398). A balance of the two ways of thinking would be more practical, but in reality, the lower class in social stratification is left looking up to those in the top rung of the strata. This, in itself, answers the question of how corporations have come to their position of power in society. They have slowly shifted the collective mindset of individuals into believing that the big company and the ideals that they propagate are true and proper. Power, if harnessed properly, can be an influential force in society. In the hands of the wrong people, however, it can be quite destructive. Corporations should not be not judged as being evil entities in and of themselves, but they should recognize the influence that they hold over the people in which they are located. Out of basic necessity, many individuals are subject to the decisions that corporations make and they must lives their lives in submission to the corporate mindset. As mentioned, of the all the ethnic groups observed and interviewed for this ethnography, on the Hispanic culture seemed to relatively untouched by corporate culture. In many ways this is refreshing, but in others it is quite troubling. Has an ethnic group that has shifted its decision making power over to the corporation done a disservice to its own traditional values? Or, has such an ethnic group simply shown the power and the willingness to effectively adapt and assimilate into a more modern and technological culture? This is something that remains to be seen and, perhaps, should form the basis for another, more in-depth, study in the future. Works Cited Allan, Kenneth. Explorations in Classical Sociological Theory: Seeing the Social World. Pine Forge Press, 2005. Print. Bond, Niall. “Ferdinand Tonnies’ Appraisal of Karl Marx: Debts and Distance.” Journal of Classical Sociology. 13.1 (2013): 136-162. Calhoun, Craig. Classical Sociological Theory. Wiley-Blackwell, 2002. Print. Kilbourne, Jean. Deadly Persuasion: Why Women and Girls Must Fight the Addictive Power of Advertising. New York, NY: Free, 1999. Print. Lefebvre, Alexandre., and White, Melanie. “Bergson on Durkheim: Society sui generis”. Journal of Classical Sociology. 10.4 (2010): 457-477. Mestrovic, Stjepan., and Lorenzo, Ronald. “Durkheim’s Concept of Anomie.” Journal of Classical Sociology. 8.2 (2008): 179-207. Misztal, Barbara. “Durkheim on Collective Memory.” 3.2 (2003): 123-143. Nelson, Bryan. “Politics of the Senses: Karl Marx and Empirical Subjectivity.” Subjectivity. 4.4 (2011): 395-412. Ritzer, George. Contemporary Sociological Theory and Its Classical Roots: The Basics. McGraw-Hill, 2009. Print. Van de Walle, Guy. “Durkheim and Socialization” Durkheimian Studies.14.1 (2008): 35-58. Weyher, Frank. “Re-Reading Sociology via the Emotions: Karl Marx’s Theory of Human Nature and Estrangement.” Sociological Perspectives. 55.2 (2012): 341-363. Wolff, Rick. “In Capitalist Crisis, Rediscovering Marx.” Socialism and Democracy. 24.3 (2010): 130-146. Read More