Resources: Main Page | Research Methods (A) | Major Theories (B) | Issues and Contemporary Topics (C) | Professional Community (D)
Aisle B (Major Theories): Classical Theories (BA) | Org. Behavior – Individual (BB1) | Org. Behavior – Groups & Teams (BB2) | Org. Behavior – Systems & Culture (BB3) | Contingency Theories (BC) | Org. Design (BD) | Org. Development & Change (BG) | Human Relations Theories (BH) | Institution Theories (BI) | Leadership Theories (BL) | Modern Management Perspectives (BM) | Postmodern & Critical Theories (BQ) | Sociology & Anthropology (BS)
Rack BS (Sociology & Anthropology): Pragmatism | Economic Sociology
Jump to: Importance | Theories | Research Areas | TAOP Episodes | References
What is the Relationship Between Sociological and Anthropological Perspectives and Organization Studies?
These academic disciplines offer complementary lenses that have fundamentally shaped how scholars study and comprehend organizations.
Sociology brings a macro-level perspective that helps us understand how organizations exist within broader social structures. This perspective reveals how organizations both shape and are shaped by society. For instance, when studying a corporation, sociologists might examine how social class influences hiring practices, or how organizational hierarchies mirror broader social inequalities. Sociologists focus on topics such as power dynamics, institutional forces, and social networks within organizations. For example, Weber’s theory of bureaucracy (see Episode 6) helps explain why organizations tend toward certain structural patterns, or how institutional theory (Rack BI) shows why companies in the same industry often adopt similar practices even when those practices aren’t necessarily the most efficient.
Anthropology contributes a distinct perspective through its emphasis on culture and ethnographic methods. Anthropologists immerse themselves in organizational settings to understand the lived experiences of organizational members. This approach reveals subtle cultural patterns that might be missed by other research methods. An anthropologist studying a tech startup might observe how casual dress codes and open office layouts reflect and reinforce cultural values of innovation and collaboration. They would pay attention to organizational stories, rituals, and symbols – like how companies celebrate successes or handle failures – to understand deeper cultural meanings.
When these perspectives combine in organization studies, they create a useful framework for understanding organizational life. For example, there are methodological approaches that cross over well to organizational studies. Organizations can be studied using both sociological tools (like network analysis and surveys) and anthropological methods (like participant observation and ethnographic interviews). This combination provides both breadth and depth of understanding. Concepts from both fields enrich organizational theory as well. For instance, sociological ideas about institutionalization combine with anthropological insights about culture to explain how organizational practices become taken-for-granted norms. And the insights from sociology and anthropology can be quite practical. When implementing change initiatives, for example, leaders can consider both structural factors (sociology) and cultural implications (anthropology).
Short List of Sociologists and Anthropologists Contributing to Organization Studies
Some sociologists are already included in the organization studies canon, such as Max Weber and his theory of bureaucracy (covered in Episode 6). The focus for this page is on sociologists who perhaps did not study organizations directly, whose works extended beyond the organizational level of analysis such as whole societies (and perhaps how they organize themselves differently), or whose organizational studies contributions had much broader impacts than organizations alone. Some of the individuals below were neither sociologists nor anthropologists but were simply great thinkers and perhaps philosophers. In all cases, their works produced many ideas about organizations. (We welcome suggestions regarding who is here and whether they should be listed somewhere else in the sight — use suggestion link at right).
The list is far from exhaustive but represent some of the thought leaders commonly included in graduate course syllabi whose ideas are most helpful for understanding the construct of organization and its places within societies. Suggestions welcome.
Émile Durkheim. Durkheim is perhaps best known for his rational approaches to sociology and the construct of the “social fact” which constituted a rational way of understanding actions, perspectives, and feelings outside the individual. His work on the division of labor and social solidarity provided insights about how complex organizations maintain cohesion, and explains “groupish” behaviors that encourages collective action, doing things as a group that the individuals could or would not do independently. His concepts about mechanical and organic solidarity helped scholars understand different forms of organizational integration. His work on “anomie” — the breakdown of norms and social structures over time — also influenced understanding of organizational dysfunction.
Karl Marx. Marx’s analysis of industrial capitalism and labor processes significantly influenced organizational studies and his contributions were part of a professional development workshop we hosted (Episode 46). His insights about alienation, the labor process, and class relations within organizations provided critical perspectives on how organizations function within capitalism. Where most organization theory aims to discern timeless generalities/laws of organization, Marx encouraged consideration of the specific forms of organization that arise in capitalist society.
Jane Addams. Addams’ works provided important early insights about how organizations can serve social needs while fostering democracy and participation. Her practical experience and theoretical writings about organizational democracy, particularly in Democracy and Social Ethics from 1902, offered alternative visions to bureaucratic models of organization and fostered conceptions of organizational diversity long before it became a prominent topic in the 1960s (although her focus was more generally on bringing in diverse perspectives to confront organizational biases and producing better-informed solutions). Her work showed how organizations could combine efficiency with social justice goals, though her contributions were often overlooked in mainstream organizational theory. We drew attention to a speech she delivered following the devastating results of the 1894 Pullman Railroad Strike in Episode 79.
Talcott Parsons. Parsons developed his perspective of structural functionalism in the 1930s and 1940s. It provided frameworks for understanding organizations as social systems with interrelated parts serving different functions. His AGIL schema (Adaptation, Goal attainment, Integration, Latency) influenced how subsequent scholars analyzed organizational systems.
George Herbert Mead. Mead is perhaps best known (well, at least for us) for his short paper, “the I and the Me,” that explained the presence of individuals as both subjects and objects. He founded the perspective of symbolic interactionism that while not directly focused on organizations or organizational phenomena, it provided important insights about how meaning is created through social interaction. This influenced later understanding of organizational culture and symbolism.
Robert Merton. We include Merton here not because of his work in the 1940s on bureaucratic dysfunction and unintended consequences, goal displacement, and trained incapacity, but due to his contributions to the sociology of science. This is the study of how acts of research influence and are influenced by the contexts being investigated. We covered two of his early essays (Episode 115) whereby he and his research teams reflect on the challenges and difficulties of performing field work. The aims were to explicate the effort to better understand how to study social change in organizations undergoing technological transformations.
Pierre Bourdieu. His concepts of habitus, field, and different forms of “capital” have been highly influential in organizational studies. His ideas offered explanations on how power operates in organizations through informal mechanisms and how organizational practices reproduce social inequalities. His concept of “field” has been particularly useful for understanding how organizations compete and relate to each other within specific domains. The notion of cultural capital has helped scholars understand professional expertise and status in organizations.
John Dewey and American Pragmatism. The pragmatist philosophy significantly influenced early organizational thought, particularly through his ideas about experiential learning and democracy in institutions. We will highlight two of his books here, Democracy and Education from 1916 and Experience and Education in 1938. These works shaped understanding of how organizations can foster learning and participation. His ideas about how institutions can support or hinder democratic practice influenced early thinking about organizational structure and governance.
Anthony Giddens. Giddens’ The Constitution of Society is an important book from 1984 that introduced structuration theory that altered understanding of the relationship between individuals and social structures, including organizations. The key insight is that structure and agency (individual action) are viewed as two sides of the same coin. Giddens proposed that social structures – like organizational rules, resources, and hierarchies – both enable and constrain human action, while simultaneously being produced and reproduced by those very actions.
What’s particularly interesting is how these thinkers offered alternatives to the dominant Weberian model of bureaucratic organization. Dewey and Addams especially emphasized more democratic and participatory forms of organizing, while Bourdieu provided tools for understanding how power operates through cultural and social mechanisms rather than just formal authority.
Contemporary Research Areas
The goal here is to to look outside the boundary of organizational studies to look at research in sociology and anthropology with potential organizational impacts. These boundaries are quite porous, naturally, so we tried to develop a manageable set of broad themes. Comments and suggestions most welcome.
Advancing the study of culture. Traditionally in the domain of anthropology, culture has been integrated into organizational studies to understand how interpersonal or collectives narratives shape workplace behaviors and organizational effectiveness. “Organizational culture” (see Rack BH) has evolved to encompass a holistic approach that considers systems of meaning, values, and actions within organizations, thereby enhancing our understanding of how culture impacts organizational performance (Michulek, 2023). Scholars are increasingly interested in how cultural narratives and practices shape organizational identities and influence employee behavior. For instance, one study analyzes trends in organizational sociology indicates a growing interest in business-related topics, reflecting a shift towards understanding how cultural factors impact organizational performance and employee engagement (Grothe‐Hammer & Kohl, 2020).
Social identity in organizational settings. Studies have shown that social identities, including race, gender, and class, significantly influence workplace dynamics and employee interactions. For example, the concept of transcultural capital highlights how migrant youth navigate their identities within organizational contexts, which can inform how organizations approach diversity and inclusion initiatives (Cubas et al., 2022). Understanding these social identities may help organizations leverage the diverse backgrounds of their employees.
Impacts of cultural practices on organizational behavior. This perspective strives to understand how the cultural context in which organizations operate (particularly in sectors like security and public safety) is influenced by cultural dynamics regarding matters of policy and practice. For example, Karas (2024) examined how cultural criminology and counter-extremism demonstrates how cultural narratives can shape organizational responses to social issues, such as extremism and violence.
Intersection of culture and creative industries. The exploration of cultural production and its implications for organizational practices is quite interesting. Roberts & Strandvad (2022) proposed a framework for understanding artist residencies as creative ecologies, which may inform how organizations acknowledge or recognize the cultural dimensions of creative work and how these dimensions can enhance collaboration, innovation, and organizational learning.
Cultural journalism. Cultural journalism is a subfield of journalism that covers a society’s cultural capital — arts, lifestyles, popular culture, etc. (Riegert et al., 2018). Scholars are looking into how cultural journalism may influence organizational communication. For example, Kristensen (2019) highlights how media representations of culture can influence public perceptions and organizational reputations. This research is particularly relevant for organizations seeking to manage their brand and engage with stakeholders effectively.
Related TAOP Episodes, Events, and Notes
117: Economic Sociology & Valuation – Marion Fourcade
115: Sociology of Science — Robert K. Merton
110: Organizations and Law – Lauren Edelman
106: The Study of Organizations Across Disciplines
79: Labor Relations – Jane Addams
46: Classics of Management and Organization Theory – AoM 2018 Workshop LIVE
44: Transaction Costs and Boundaries of the Firm – Williamson and Malone
Related Resource Pages
Rack BA — Classic Organization and Management Theory
Rack BB1 – Organizational Behavior (Micro-Individual)
Rack BB2 — Organizational Behavior (Meso-Groups and Teams)
Rack BB3 — Organizational Behavior (Macro-Org/System)
Rack BC — Contingency Theory
Rack BD — Organizational Design
Rack BG — Organizational Development and Change
Rack BH – Human Dimension – Culture, Climate, Identity
Rack BI — Institution Theory
Rack BL — Leadership Theories
Rack BM – Modern Management Theories
Rack BQ — Postmodern and Critical Theories
Rack BS — Sociology & Anthropology
References
On Jane Addams:
- Addams, J. (1912). A modern Lear. Survey, 29, 131-137.
- Also see Jane Addams Papers Project, Ramapo College of New Jersey.
On Pierre Bourdieu:
- Grenfell, M. (2012). Pierre Bourdieu: Key concepts, 2nd ed. Durham, UK: Acumen.
On John Dewey:
- Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education. New York: Macmillan.
- Dewey, J. (1922). Human nature and conduct: An introduction to social psychology. New York: Henry Holt and Company.
On Émile Durkheim:
- Durkheim, E. (1893). The division of labor in society, Simpson, G. (trans.). Free Press.
- Durkheim, E. (1982/1895). The rules of sociological method: and selected texts on sociology and its method, Lukes, S. (trans.). Free Press.
On Anthony Giddens:
- Giddens, A. (1979). The constitution of society. University of California Press.
On Karl Marx:
- Marx, K. (1867). Das Kapital: Kritik de politischen Oeconommie. Hamburg: Meissner.
- Pitts, F. H. (2022). Marx in Management and Organisation Studies: Rethinking Value, Labour and Class Struggles. Routledge.
On George Herbert Mead:
- Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, self & society. University of Chicago press. (published posthumously)
- Mead, G. H. (1961). Selected readings from T. Parsons (Ed.), Theories of Society: Foundations of Modern Sociological Theory (pp. 163-168). NY: The Free Press.
- The I and the Me (pp. 163-168).
- Taking the Role of the Other (pp. 739-740).
- Internalized Others and the Self (pp. 829-830).
- From Gesture to Symbol (pp. 999-1004).
On Robert K. Merton:
- Merton, R. K. (1947). The machine, the worker, and the engineer. Science, 105(2717), 79-84.
- Merton, R. K. (1947). Selected problems of field work in the planned community. American Sociological Review, 12(3), 304-312.
On Talcott Parsons:
- Parsons, T. (1991). The early essays. University of Chicago Press.
- Parsons, T., & Sciortino, G. (2015). American society: Toward a theory of societal community. Routledge.
On Max Weber:
- Weber. M. (1922) Economy and Society. CA: University of California Press.
- Weber, M. (2009). From Max Weber: Essays in sociology. Routledge.
Anthropic. (2024). What is the relationship between sociological and anthropological perspectives and organization studies; Which sociologists and anthropologists who were not organizational scholars contributed most to organization studies. Claude (March 2024 version) [Large Language Model].
Cubas, M., Al-deen, T., & Mansouri, F. (2022). Transcultural capital and emergent identities among migrant youth. Journal of Sociology, 59(3), 754-771. https://doi.org/10.1177/14407833211066969
Grothe‐Hammer, M. and Kohl, S. (2020). The decline of organizational sociology? an empirical analysis of research trends in leading journals across half a century. Current Sociology, 68(4), 419-442. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392120907627
Karas, T. (2024). Cultural criminology, counter-extremism and the contemporary far right. Crime, Media, Culture: An International Journal. https://doi.org/10.1177/17416590241279413
Kristensen, N. N. (2019). Arts, Culture, and Entertainment Coverage. The International Encyclopedia of Journalism Studies, 1-9.
Michulek, J., Gajanova, L., Krizanova, A., & Nadanyiova, M. (2023). Determinants of improving the relationship between corporate culture and work performance: Illusion or reality of serial mediation of leadership and work engagement in a crisis period? Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1135199.
Riegert, K., Roosvall, A., & Widholm, A. (2018). Cultural journalism. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Communication.
Roberts, K. S., & Strandvad, S. M. (2023). Artist residencies as creative ecologies: Proposing a new framework for twenty-first-century cultural production. In McCormick, L. (ed.), The Cultural Sociology of Art and Music: New Directions and New Discoveries (pp. 43-69). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
Scite. (2024). What are the contemporary research areas in sociology and anthropology that are contributing significantly to organization studies today; Please elaborate on this question regarding specific topics such as advancing the study of culture, social identity in organizations, impacts of cultural practices on organizational behavior, and the intersection of culture and creative industries. Scite (April 2024 version) [Large Language Model].
The inclusion of external links is for informational purposes only and does not necessarily constitute endorsement by TAOP or any of its members.
Jump to: Importance | Theories | Research Areas | TAOP Episodes | References
Rack BS (Sociology & Anthropology): Pragmatism | Economic Sociology
Aisle B (Major Theories): Classical Theories (BA) | Org. Behavior – Individual (BB1) | Org. Behavior – Groups & Teams (BB2) | Org. Behavior – Systems & Culture (BB3) | Contingency Theories (BC) | Org. Design (BD) | Org. Development & Change (BG) | Human Relations Theories (BH) | Institution Theories (BI) | Leadership Theories (BL) | Modern Management Perspectives (BM) | Postmodern & Critical Theories (BQ) | Sociology & Anthropology (BS)
Resources: Main Page | Research Methods (A) | Major Theories (B) | Issues and Contemporary Topics (C) | Professional Community (D)