For this episode, we return to Alvin Gouldner (who we previously covered in Episode 78) – this time for his work in latent role identities. Gouldner wrote this 2-piece article, “Cosmopolitans and locals: Toward an analysis of latent social roles” to introduce the concept of latent roles—previously overlooked by scholars. The justification and theoretical proposition dominated the first part of the article, published in late 1957. Gouldner argued that manifest roles, described as those roles and role identities that are directly related to one’s defined position in the organizational structure, had been the sole focus of sociologists. He introduced latent roles that comprise the complementary roles that members make salient but are not officially recognized. Managers and researchers might dismiss such roles as “irrelevant, inappropriate to consider, or illegitimate to take into account” despite them being essential in the organization’s social fabric.

An example that we presented in our discussion arises during a hiring action when members of the organization might be expected to take applicants to dinner, in effect taking on a latent role of host and organizational representation. Playing the role serves not only to enhance the applicant’s experience of seeking the job, but also to signal the desirability of the organization to other applicants.

Gouldner used a study he conducted at a “small, private, liberal arts college… conducted on a cooperative plan” as an application for his theory. What he found was that, despite formal (manifest) roles, there was a significant difference in behaviors between those who were fully loyal to the organization and those whose commitment was to their expertise and communities of practice (and less so to the organization). In Part I of the article, Gouldner identified the former as locals and the latter as cosmopolitans.

In the second half of the article, published in early 1958, Gouldner presented an initial proposal for a taxonomy of four types of locals and two types of cosmopolitans as a way kickstart the broader research agenda and deepen our understanding of latent roles. However, this groundbreaking study had some significant limitations, most notably that the separation between manifest and latent roles was at times not clear. In Part 2 of this episode we cover some of the different directions that later scholarship has offered, to bring more clarity to the latent role construct. However, in terms of Gouldner’s aim of construct development and drawing attention to a long-running research gap, one can say that this article meant the mission was accomplished.

You may also download the audio files here:  Part 1 | Part 2 | Teaser

Read with us:

Gouldner, A. W. (1957). Cosmopolitans and locals: Toward an analysis of latent social roles. I. Administrative science quarterly, 2(3),281-306.

Gouldner, A. W. (1958). Cosmopolitans and locals: Toward an analysis of latent social roles. II. Administrative science quarterly, 2(4),444-480.

To Learn More:

Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8325.1990.tb00506.x

Carton, A. M. (2018). “I’m Not Mopping the Floors, I’m Putting a Man on the Moon”: How NASA Leaders Enhanced the Meaningfulness of Work by Changing the Meaning of Work. Administrative Science Quarterly, 63(2), 323–369. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001839217713748

Goffman, E. (1956). The presentation of self in everyday life. Doubleday.

Kanter, R. M. (1968). Commitment and Social Organization: A Study of Commitment Mechanisms in Utopian Communities. American Sociological Review, 33(4), 499. https://doi.org/10.2307/2092438

Wrzesniewski, A., & Dutton, J. E. (2001). Crafting a Job: Revisioning Employees as Active Crafters of Their Work. Academy of Management Review, 26(2), 179–201. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2001.4378011

Other Talking About Organizations Podcast episodes referenced:

Episode 78. Emergence of Middle Management — Alfred Chandler