Administrative Background of Social Inequality: Elite Theory

Year 2021, , 990 - 1027, 18.09.2021

Erdem Kırkbeşoğlu

https://doi.org/10.25295/fsecon.973502

Abstract

In social life, the concept of "inequality" has an important position in determining the shape of both individuals' relations with each other and their interactions with different communities. In particular, factors such as prestige, fame, wealth, income, profession, talent, race, ethnicity, gender and age affect the relations and social interactions of individuals with other individuals. In today's social structures, the effects of social and economic inequality provide unequal opportunities to different individuals within the group or groups that are a part of the society. These opportunities, which lead to inequality, cause some people to take a more active position in the decision-making process, depending on their access to respect and resources in the society. This effect, which puts individuals in a more effective position in decision-making processes, will not only result in the emergence of inequality, but also that power relations and power structures will be oriented in favour of certain people in society. The aim of this study is to describe the theoretical foundations of the elite theory, which is based on the balance between the rulers in the society and the ordinary people, both sociologically and administratively. The reasons and main causes of inequality between individuals who are part of societies, organizations and groups will be discussed with an inclusive perspective. The study aims to present a comprehensive analysis of the elite theory by combining the theoretical assumptions obtained from numerous studies on management and sociology literature.

Keywords

elite theory, elites, inequality

Toplumsal Eşitsizliğin Yönetsel Temelleri: Elit (Seçkin) Kuramı

Abstract

Toplumsal yaşamda gerek bireylerin birbirleriyle olan ilişkilerinin, gerekse de farklı topluluklarla olan etkileşimlerinin şeklini tayin etmede, “eşitsizlik” unsuru önemli bir konuma sahiptir. Özellikle saygınlık, ün, servet, gelir, meslek, yetenek, ırk, etnik yapı, cinsiyet ve yaş gibi unsurlar bireylerin, diğer bireylerle olan münasebetlerini ve sosyal etkileşimlerini etkilemektedir. Günümüz toplumsal yapılarında, sosyal ve ekonomik açılardan eşitsizliğin etkileri, toplumun bir parçası konumunda olan grup veya gruplar içindeki farklı bireylere eşit olmayan fırsatlar sunmaktadır. Eşitsizliğe yol açan bu fırsatlar ise bir takım kişilerin, toplumdaki saygınlık ve maddi kaynaklara ulaşmasına bağlı olarak, karar verme sürecinde daha etkin bir konuma gelmelerine neden olur. Bireyleri karar verme süreçlerinde daha etkin bir konuma çıkaran bu etki sadece eşitsizliğin ortaya çıkmasında değil, aynı zamanda güç ilişkileri ve iktidar yapılarının da toplum içerisinde belirli kişiler lehine yönleneceği sonucunu yaratacaktır. Bu çalışmanın amacı toplumda yönetenler ile yönetilenler arasındaki dengeyi temel alan elit (seçkin) kuramının, gerek sosyolojik gerekse de yönetimsel açıdan kuramsal temellerini betimlemektir. Toplumlar, örgütler ve grupların bir parçası olan bireyler arasında ortaya çıkan eşitsizliğin gerekçeleri ve temel nedenleri kapsayıcı bir perspektifle ele alınacaktır. Çalışma yönetim ve sosyoloji yazınına yönelik çok sayıda çalışmadan elde edilmiş kuramsal varsayımları birleştirerek elit kuramına yönelik kapsamlı bir çözümleme sunmayı amaçlamaktadır.

Keywords

elit kuramı, seçkin kuramı, elitler, seçkinler, eşitsizlik

References

• Alvesson, M. ve Robertson, M. (2006). The Best and the Brightest: The Construction, Significance and Effects of Elite Identities in Consulting Firm. Organizations, 13(2): 195–224.
• Andersen, M. L. ve Taylor, H. F. (2006). Sociology: understanding a diverse society. Thomson.
• Arslan, A. (2003), Eşitsizliğin Teorik Temelleri: Elit Teorisi, Kocaeli Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, Cilt: 6, Sayı: 2: 115-135.
• Aron, R. (1950). “Social Structure and the Ruling Class”. British Journal of Sociology, vol. 1.
• Astley, W.G. ve Zajac, E.J. (1991). Intraorganizational Power and Organizational Design: Reconciling Rational and Coalitional Models of Organization. Organization Science, 2 (4) 399-411 https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2.4.399
• Baykal, D. (1963). Siyasi Elit Kuramı. Doktora Tezi. Ankara Üniversitesi.
• Baylis, T. A. (1974). The technical intelligentsia and the East German elite: legitimacy and social change in Mature Communism. University of California Press.
• Berberoğlu, B. (2005). An introduction to classical and contemporary social theory: a critical perspective. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
• Bottomore, T.B. (1997). Seçkinler ve Toplum, (çev. Ünsal Oskay), Doğan Yayın Evi, Ankara.
• Bourdieu, P. (1987). What Makes a Social Class? On the Theoretical and Practical Existence of Groups. Çev: Emrah Göker (http://www.sosyolojizanaati.com/belgeler/eg-06002.pdf) Berkeley Journal of Sociology 32: 1-17.
• Bozoki, A. (2003). Theoretical interpratations of elite cahange of east central europe. (edt) Dogan, M. Elite configurations at the apex of power. Brill.
• Burnham, J. (1941). The managerial revolution. New York.
• Burton, M.G. ve Higley, J. (1987). Elite Settlements. American Sociological Review, Vol. 52, No. 3, pp. 295-307
• Cazenave, N. A. (2007). Impossible democracy: the unlikely success of the war on poverty community. State University New York Press.
• Clegg, S.R., Courpasson, D. ve Phillips, N. (2006). Power and Organizations. Sage Publicatin Series.
• Cole, G.D.H. (1955). Studies in Class Structure, London.
• Dahl, R. A. (1966). Who Governs? Yale University Press.
• Dekmejian, R. H. (1975). Patterns of political leadership: Egypt, Israel, Lebanon. State University of New York Press.
• Domhoff, G. W. (1967). Who rules America? Prentice-Hall.
• Domhoff, G. W. (1978). Who really rules?: New Haven and community power reexamined. Trancactions Publishers.
• Domhoff, G. W. (1990). The power elite and the state: how policy is made in America. Walter De Gruyter Inc. New York.
• Dye, T. R., Zeigler, H. (2004). The Irony of Democracy: An Uncommon Introduction to American Politics. Thomson Advantage Books.
• Etzioni-Halevy, E. (1989). Bureaucracy and democracy: a political dilemma.Routledge & Kegan Paul.
• Etzioni-Halevy, E. (1993). The Elite Connection. London: Polity Press.
• Evans, M. ve Coen, L. (2003). Elitism and agri-environmental policy in Ireland. (edt) M. Adshead, M. Millar. Routledge. London.
• Farazmand, A. (1999). The Elite Question. Towards a Normative Elite Theory of Organization, Administration and Society, 31: 321–360.
• Farazmand, A. (2002). Elite Theory of Organization: Building a Normative Foundation. Farazmand, A. (edt.). Modern organizations: theory and practice, Greenwood Publishing. USA.
• Foucault, M. (2015). İktidarın Gözü. (çev. Ergüden, I.) İstanbul: Ayrıntı Yayınları.
• Giddens, A. (2000). Sosyoloji. Ankara: Ayraç Yayınevi.
• Guttsman, L. W. (1951). The Changing Social Structure of the British Political Élite, 1886-1935. The British Journal of Sociology, Vol. 2, No. 2, s. 122-134.
• Guttsman, L. W. (1960). Social Stratification and Political Élite. The British Journal of Sociology, Vol. 11, No. 2, s. 137-150.
• Harding, A. (1995). Elite Theory and Growth Machines. (edt) Judge, D., Stoker, G. ve Wolman, H. Sage Publications.
• Heemskerk, E. M. (2007). Decline of the Corporate Community: Network Dynamics of the Dutch Business Elite. Amsterdam University Press.
• Higley, J. ve Moore, G. (1981). Elite Integration in the United States and Australia. The American Political Science Review, Vol. 75, No. 3, pp. 581-597.
• Jack, M. (1974). Elite Theory: ideological, Tautological and Scientific.(edt) Crewe, I. Elites in Western democracy. The Trinity Press.
• Kapani, M. (2000). Politika Bilimine giriş. Bilgi Yayınevi. İstanbul.
• Keller, S. I. (1991). Beyond the ruling class: strategic elites in modern society. Trancactions Publishers.
• Kourvetaris, G. A. (1996). Political sociology: Structure and Process. Allyn and Bacon.
• Lasswell, H. D. (2003). The analysis of political behaviour: an empirical approach. Arbor Vitae.
• Lawson, T. ve Garrod, J. (2001). Dictionary of sociology. Fitzroy Dearborn Publishers.
• Lawson, T., Jones, M. ve Moores, R. (2006). Advanced sociology through diagrams. Oxford University Press.
• Lipset, S. M. ve Bendix, R. (1992). Social mobility in industrial society. Trancactions Publishers.
• Malesevic, S. (2004). The sociology of ethnicity. Sage Publications.
• Mann, M. (1986). The Sources of Social Power: A history of power from the beginning to A.D. 1760. Cambridge University Press.
• Marger, M.N. (1981). Elites and Masses: An Introduction to Political Sociology. Van Nostrand Company
• Marsh, D. (1985). Interest Group in Britain: their access and power. (edt) M. B. Douglas J.J. Gardner. Manchester University Press.
• Michels, R. (2001). Political Parties: A Sociological Study of the Oligarchical Tendencies of Modern Democracy. Batoche Books Kitchener.
• Miliband, R. (2009). The State in Capitalist Society, London: Merlin Press,
• Mills, W. (1974). İktidar Seçkinleri. Bilgi Yayınevi. Ankara
• Mizruchi, M. S. (1992). The structure of corporate political action: interfirm relations and their consequences. Harvard Collage.
• Mizruchi, M. S. ve Bey, D. M. (2005). Corporate control, Interfirm Relations, and corporate power. (edt) T. Janoski, R. Alford, A. Hicks, M. Schwartz. Cambridge University Press.
• Mosca, G. (1939). The Ruling Class. New York: McGraw Hill.
• Palmer, D. ve Maher, M. (2005). Strategic Organization Vol 3(4): 385–430.
• Pareto, V. (1935). The Mind and Society. New York : Harcourt Brace and Co.
• Parry, G. (2005). Political Elites. ECPR Press.
• Pettigrew, A.M. (1992). On Studying Managerial Elites. Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 13, Special Issue: Fundamental Themes in Strategy
• Presthus, R. (1974). Elites in the policy process. Cambridge University Press.
• Sartori, G. (1965). Democratic Theory. Detroit: Wayne University Press
• Schumpeter, J. A. (1955). Imperialism and Social classes; two essays. New York, Meridian Books.
• Seligman, L. (2005). Political Mobility and Development. (edt) N. J. Smelster ve M. Lipset. Trancactions Publishers.
• Smith, C. E. ve Freedman, A. E. (1972). Voluntary associations; perspectives on the literature. Harvard University Press.
• Thoenes, P. (1966). The Elite in The Welfare State. (Edt Banks, J. A.). The Free Pres. London.
• Useem, M. (1984). The Inner Circle. Oxford University Press, New York.
• Vergin, N. (2003). Siyasetin Sosyolojisi Kavramlar, Tanımlar, Yaklaşımlar. Bağlam Yayınları. İstanbul.
• Windolf, P. (2002). Corporate networks in Europe and the United States. Oxford Pres
• Young, C. (1979). The politics of cultural pluralism. University of Wisconsin Press.
• Zeitlin, M. (1974). Corporate ownership and control: the large corporation and the capitalist class. American Journal of Sociology. 79:1073- 119.