Structural functionalism is a particular branch of sociology that looks rather mechanically at social structure and explains its coherence and persistence across time. It can be described as a school of thought whereby society is conceived as an amalgam of institutions, relationships, roles and norms. Each serves a particular purpose, and each is indispensable for the continued existence of the others and of society as a whole. Within this model of social order, a role is an identity label that assigns individuals particular places and powers within the social system; places and powers that are in turn recognisable by others who belong to that same society. Thus: a teacher is a classroom is expected to teach, to read and grade assignments; and to provide scholarly advice; while a student is expected to learn; follow their teachers’ guidance; compete assignments; and so on. Every person is society is expected to perform multiple roles – for example, that of a parent, teacher, friend, neighbour, political activist, club member, supermarket shopper, bus passenger, and so on – together forming a role set. For each role, persons typically enter into relationships with different members of their society.
There is nothing specific about small social systems here. What becomes significant is that, with smaller social systems, the likelihood that role overlap occurs increase. You board a bus as a passenger, but the driver is your uncle; you teach a class, but one of your students is your cousin; you work in a bank, but one of the staff members is your partner … The members that are ‘at home’ in relation to one particular role are also members of one’s other role/s. The odds of this happening increase with the practice of role multiplicity, a function of flexible specialisation. When such situations occur, the norms, responsibilities and behaviour expected by the complementarity of roles (driver-passenger; teacher-student; etc.,) can get blurred and become indeterminate.
Such situations breed role conflict: they provide unclear signals as to which particular protocol should prevail to the parties in the relationship. The situation is open to creative exploitation or accommodation, and can even lead to corruption. Such behaviour is denounced, of course; and there may be strategies to put into place to prevent such situations from emerging in the first place: teachers should not teach and assess their own relatives; and partners should not work in the same bank branch, for example. But in practice, such elegant solutions may not exist, especially where there is no open availability of alternatives.
To the untrained eye of an external observer, role conflict is rife in small societies. The complex interlocking nature of friendships and relationships can render the presumed objectivity and legal-rational basis of roles somewhat dubious. Outsiders can find themselves bemused by the games that people in small social systems play: role multiplicity, for example, has been described as crisis management verging on the comic (Weeks and Weeks, 1989) and role overload (Krone et al., 1989, p. 62), apart from role conflict (Baldacchino, 1997, p. 170). To insiders, this is just the routine of life in a small (often island) society. Role overlaps are “messy” (Baldacchino, 2007, p. 7). They will not go away. They must be managed as best they can; boundaries should be respected, and role incumbents spared from the embarrassment or uncertainties that can impact on their work and their probity.
Functionalism is no longer such a dominant school of thought in sociology. It has been criticised heavily for such weaknesses as neglecting agency, its inability to accommodate conflict and to properly explain social change, and its failure to address such inequalities as those based on race, class or gender. For this reason, the study of roles in social systems is no longer a popular pursuit. However, the design of ‘checks and balances’ within or between organisations often assumes that impartiality and professional objectivity across human relationships can be established. But the multiple ways in which people may be known to, and related to, each other, with associated sympathies and antipathies, in small social systems is a given that can impact such relationships. Political parties, for example, can dominate all three branches of government, directly or otherwise, even in democracies; and not just in small island jurisdictions; although in the latter such a situation is more likely to unfold (Baldacchino, 2012).
Baldacchino, G. (1997). Global tourism and informal labour relations: The small scale syndrome at work. London: Mansell.
Baldacchino, G. (2012). Islands and despots. Commonwealth & Comparative Politics, 50(1), 103-120.
Baldacchino, G. (2013). History and identity across small islands: A Caribbean and a personal journey. Miscellanea Geographica, 17(2), 5-11.
Krone, C., Tabacchi, M. & Farber, B. (1989). A conceptual and empirical investigation of workplace burnout in the food service. Hospitality Education and Research Journal, 13(1), 83-91.
Weeks, J., and Weeks, P. (1989). A day in the life of the Ministry of Education: case study Vitalu. Survival is the name of the game. Paper presented at Pan-Commonwealth meeting on the organisation of ministries of education in small states. Malta: University of Malta.