Theoretical Perspectives on Work and Economy Problems

Each of the three classical sociological perspectives offers a different take on work and economy. As described in early chapters of this textbook and below, conflict theory was inspired by Karl Marx, who along with his colleague Friedrich Engels wrote about the social class conflict between workers and employers after Industrialization, in which the exploited proletariat (workers) would rise up against the bourgeoisie (owners of the means of production), causing capitalism to fall in favor of socialism and eventually communism. Thus, conflict theory has a long history of emphasizing work and economy. However, structural functionalism and symbolic interactionism have also offered important insights, particularly in terms of the functions and dysfunctions of the institution of work and social interactions within workplaces. The Snapshot table below summarizes these perspectives.

Theoretical Perspectives Snapshot

Theoretical perspective	Major assumptions
Structural functionalism	Work and the economy serve several functions for society. The economy makes society possible by providing the goods and services it needs. Work gives people an income and also provides them some self-fulfillment and part of their identity.
Conflict theory	Control of the economy enables the economic elite to maintain their position at the top of society and to keep those at the bottom in their place. Work is often alienating, and the workplace is often a site for sexual harassment and other problems.
Symbolic interactionism	This perspective focuses on social interaction in the workplace, on how employees respond to problems in their workplaces, and on how they perceive the work they do.

  

Structural Functionalism

Recall that the functionalist perspective highlights the many functions that social institutions serve for society. Accordingly, this perspective paints a positive picture of work and the economy by pointing to their many benefits.

The economy’s major function is an essential function: The provision of goods and services. Because the economy provides the goods and services that any society needs, the economy makes a society possible. As we saw earlier, capitalist and socialist societies provide goods and services in different ways, and each type of economy has its advantages and disadvantages. 

The institution of work itself has an important function in capitalist societies: Helping its members survive and thrive. Most people work for pay once they reach adulthood, and sometimes earlier. Some work full-time until they retire, some alternate full-time work and part-time work, and some may start out with a job but drop out of the labor force to raise their children. Regardless of these various work patterns, an important function that most people derive from working is their income. Simply put, work provides the paycheck that most people need for food, clothing, shelter, and other essential needs in today’s society.

But work has important, nonmaterial functions beyond helping us pay the bills. Many people in the US consider their job part of their identity. We may identify ourselves as accountant, claims adjuster, day care worker, construction worker, elementary school teacher, banker, financial consultant, garage door installer, and so forth. The career we have helps provide us with a sense of who we are, or, to put it another way, a sense of our identity. This phenomenon is more prominent in US society than other wealthy democracies, in part due to the Protestant Work Ethic that was dominant in the early years of the nation's development. This ideology positioned work as a defining feature of an individual's worth. Today, Americans likely ask, "What do you do?" as the first question they pose after meeting someone new, whereas Europeans may ask, "What are your hobbies?"

Especially if we enjoy our jobs, work can also give us a sense of self-fulfillment, self-confidence, and self-esteem. These psychological effects combine to form yet another important function of work. Similarly, work provides friendships. Many people have friends and acquaintances whom they met at their workplaces or at least through their work (McGuire 2007). Coworkers discuss all kinds of topics with each other, including personal matters, sports, and political affairs, and they often will invite other coworkers over to their homes or go out with them to a movie or a restaurant. 

An important function of work is that it provides a context for coworker friendships. Many people have friends whom they met in their workplaces or through their work.

Wonderlane – Co-workers laughing at Fat Smitty’s – CC BY 2.0

The nonmaterial benefits that work provides for many people are important and should not be discounted. Although this is speculative, many wealthy people no longer need to work but continue to work because of these nonmaterial benefits. National survey data support the importance of work’s nonmaterial benefits in this regard. In the 2024 General Social Survey (GSS), respondents in the labor force were asked, “If you were to get enough money to live as comfortably as you would like for the rest of your life, would you continue to work or would you stop working?” Of respondents who answered the question (with continue to work, stop working, or don't know), nearly two-thirds (65%) replied that they would indeed continue working (GSS 2025). 

While some structural functionalists focus on how the institution of work offers benefits for individuals, others would focus on its dysfunctions. For instance, in periods of high unemployment, the institution may be critiqued for failing to provide jobs to the people who need them. Functionalists also focus on how institutions are interconnected. The institution of education may be seen as dysfunctional if it fails to prepare students for the workforce, the institutions of family and work may be seen as not functioning harmoniously when workers are not offered family-friendly policies that allow them to balance family and work life, and the institution of the state may be critiqued for lacking regulations for employers regarding paid leave, vacation time, and holidays. 

  

Conflict Theory

Conflict theory’s views of work and the economy largely derive from the writings of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels during the nineteenth century. Marx and Engels sharply criticized capitalism as an economic system that inherently oppresses workers. In their view, the bourgeoisie, or ruling class who own the means of production, oppresses the proletariat, or working class. The bourgeoisie uses its wealth, power, and influence to exploit the proletariat, with labor practices and the spread of ideologies such as the myth of meritocracy. 

Marx also wrote that work in a capitalist society is inherently alienating. This is so, he said, because workers do not design the products they build, because factory work (which was the dominant mode of production in Marx’s time) involves boring and repetitive tasks, and because workers are treated by their employers as mere commodities to be hired and fired at will. Reflecting Marx’s views, conflict theory today also points to the alienating nature of work.

Following up on this concern, social scientists have tried to determine the extent of worker alienation and job satisfaction, as well as the correlates of these two attitudes (Mauno, Kinnunen, & Feldt 2012). They generally find that American workers like their jobs much more than Marx anticipated but also that the extent to which they like their jobs depends on the income their jobs bring, the degree of autonomy they enjoy in their jobs, and other factors. In the 2024 GSS, the great majority (84.6%) of respondents said they are "very" or "moderately" satisfied with the work that they do, and only 14.5% said that they were "a little" or "very" dissatisfied (GSS 2025). This latter figure is probably much lower than Marx would have predicted for a capitalist society like the US, though he might not have envisioned the shift toward the tertiary (service) sector described on the last page. One possible reason for this low amount of job dissatisfaction, and one that Marx did not foresee, is the number of workplace friendships as described earlier. Such friendships can lead workers to like their jobs more than they otherwise would and help overcome the alienation they might feel without the friendships.

However, being satisfied with one's work overall does not mean that the job is stress-free, that workers have achieved life-work balance, or that there aren't other serious problems related to work and economy. Conflict theorists today may also be interested in how employers overwork their employees, leading to conflict between paid work and other life responsibilities and goals. In addition, conflict theory would argue that capitalism drives continued social class inequality, as well as inequalities along the lines of race, gender, nationality, age, and disability. In fact, as we will see on the following page, researchers have documented systemic discrimination in the institution of work against people in marginalized groups. Conflict theorists may claim that corporations engage in discriminatory, and sometimes inhumane, practices that harm oppressed groups and perpetuate social injustice. As just one example, they call attention to the fact that many companies maintain dangerous workplaces that result in injury, illness, and/or death for tens of thousands of workers annually. Conflict and feminist theorists also point out that the workplace is a setting for sexual harassment. Although work can and does bring the many benefits assumed by functionalist theory, work can also be a source of great distress for the hundreds of thousands of workers, particularly women, who are sexually harassed every year. Thus, although today’s conflict theorists are not necessarily Marxists, they nonetheless criticize many aspects of capitalism. 

  

Symbolic Interactionism

Recall that symbolic interactionism focuses on the interaction of individuals and on how they interpret their interaction. In line with this microsociological focus, many scholars have generated rich descriptions of how certain workplaces’ behaviors and understandings are negotiated and of how certain kinds of workers view aspects of their work and interpret the meaning of their work. Numerous studies of this type exist of police officers, attorneys, nurses and physicians, sex workers, teachers, and a variety of other occupations. Most of these studies are based on intensive interviews of people in these occupations. Taken together, they provide a sensitive portrait of why people enter these various jobs and careers, what they like and dislike about their jobs, how they interact with other people in their workplaces, and a host of other issues.

Studies of police officers’ behavior and perceptions provide an excellent example of the symbolic interactionist understanding of work. According to Jonathan Rubinstein, an important goal of officers is to maintain the respect of other officers.

West Midlands Police – Day 4 – PCSOs on Patrol in Birmingham – CC BY-SA 2.0

A classic study of the workplace grounded in the symbolic interactionist tradition was sociologist Joan Emerson’s (1970) study of gynecological exams. At the time Emerson wrote her study, most gynecologists were men. Because they are necessarily viewing and touching their patients’ reproductive organs, they have to ensure that their patients do not think their doctor is behaving in a sexual manner. For this to happen, Emerson wrote, (men) gynecologists take effort to appear as medical professionals rather than as men sexually interested in or aroused by the patient. In this way, they "define the situation" as a professional encounter rather than as a sexual encounter.

Men gynecologists use several strategies to appear professional, according to Emerson. For example, they try to have a woman nurse present during the exam to help the patient feel comfortable. These gynecologists and nurses always act in a nonchalant, matter-of-fact manner, which sends the patient an implicit message: "In the medical world the pelvic area is like any other part of the body; its private and sexual connotations are left behind when you enter the hospital" (Emerson 1970: 78). In these ways, gynecological exams are defined only as medical encounters, and patients are helped to feel as comfortable as possible under rather uncomfortable circumstances. However, research indicates that a gender preference still exists, as women visiting obstetrics and gynecology (OBGYN) clinics are more comfortable with women doctors and find it easier to discuss medical issues with women doctors, and those with less education or who are married prefer a woman OBGYN (Riaz et al. 2021).

In another classic study grounded in the symbolic interactionist tradition, Jonathan Rubinstein (1993) spent a year riding around and otherwise interacting with police officers in Philadelphia. He later wrote compellingly about police officers’ constant fear for their safety, about how they try to control suspects and other threatening people without drawing their guns, about how they interact with each other and with their superiors, and many other matters. In one passage, he wrote about how men officers try to win and keep the respect of other officers: “A patrolman must learn to avoid any appearance or incompetency if he hopes to maintain the respect of his colleagues. Every man must go to considerable lengths to cover up any weakness or error that might reflect poorly on his competence” (Rubinstein 1993: 105). Officers learn to record dispatchers’ information promptly and accurately, and they avoid remarks that question the competence of other officers. This raises questions about gender expectations, as hegemonic masculinity (discussed in the prior chapter) dictates that men never show weakness nor incompetence. 

As discussed in earlier chapters, symbolic interactionism is also interested in how stereotypes and biases shape social interactions and individuals' sense of self. Though conflict theory has a stronger focus on institutionalized discrimination of marginalized groups in workplaces, symbolic interactionism would explore how biases and stereotypes result in interpersonal discrimination, such as between white doctors working with patients of color, employers interviewing disabled applicants, or managers supervising elderly workers. As we will see next, employers have been found to systematically discriminate against workers in marginalized groups, and as we will see in a future chapter, bias in medicine contributes to racial disparities in health outcomes and quality of healthcare.