For Individual Student Use: Please do not copy! 'Inside Telephone Gals':
Micro-stratification, Ranking System, and Power Practices
This paper examined a department of a large news-gathering organization in Southern California. This publicly traded (NYSE) newspaper has been in existence for many decades. One of the departments that deals directly with generating revenue is the Recruitment Classified Department (RCD). This study of the department’s hierarchical interaction used a general micro-stratification schema derived from Sociology 436. Personal observations and interviews were made in order to measure the micro-stratification, ranking system, and power practices’ perspectives.
Micro-Stratification
Description: The RCD have eight staffs comprising of a Manager, five Sales Representatives, one General Assignment Rep, and a System Specialist. The job titles defined the roles that each employee functions within the hierarchy and organization of the department. Terri, the Manager has the distinctive position of running the department adhering to company policies by being responsible for supervising all the employees in the department. The five Sales Representatives have the role of managing their accounts with existing advertising clients and to acquire new clients by targeted telemarketing procedures outlined by the Manager. Susan, the General Assignment Rep, supports the five Sales Representatives as a "vacation filler" by covering their desk(s). Like Susan, the Systems Specialist, Lilly, also has the capabilities to fulfill the duties of a Sales Representatives. But unlike Susan, Lilly has the function of supporting the whole department. Whether it has to do with generating reports for Terri, assisting Susan, or sometimes having to fulfill the role of a Sales Representative.
Interaction: Although the employees have their role in the functioning of the department, the majority of their work overlap (excluding the Manager position). This occurs more often than not at the lower rung of the hierarchy (the General Assignment Rep and the Systems Specialist). Susan and Lilly act as the support personnel of the department. They do the grunt work to alleviate the time consuming clerical duties enabling the Sales Representatives to function efficiently to accommodate their existing advertising clients and to recruit new clients. This was the initial purpose of having these two positions. But these two positions have in time become the crutch that has made all the other staff dependent. As the support personnel become more knowledgeable of their own job description and with those of their co-workers, they have assumed more responsibilities relieving others of their responsibilities. Some of the these responsibilities include returning clients’ phone calls, mailing out promotions to companies, and the actual placement of ad orders through Advision.
It makes sense that those occupying higher positions have been granted the higher income. But in contradiction to management’s promotion of cross training, they have yet to compensate for the support personnel’s extra-workload. The discord in this department has been due to management failing to reward those based on merit and hard work over those who use the hierarchical system to reward themselves with more pay and less work.
Analysis: The stratification system of an organization such as the RCD of the one studied here, as small as it is for a department, shows some similarity to the stratification of the larger society. "All societies display a stratification structure (Beeghley)." It reflects the hierarchical interaction of our social classes (the rich, middle-class, working class, and poor) (Beeghley). More specifically, the people in the department do white-collar work. Even as white-collar workers, the administrative support positions (the lowest white-collar jobs) have historically been reserved for females (Beeghley). Despite these stratifications within the upper classes, these white-collar jobs have more job security than the blue-collar jobs of the lower classes (Beeghley).
The few who occupy the upper class have worked to maintain and support their position. They have used the system to exploit those beneath them by passing on more work to them but yet still get paid more (Beeghley). Those who occupy the lower class, although they are capable of doing the work of those above them, remain impeded in terms of growth and opportunities for advancement. They have less compensation for more work. This is due in part to the social structure that shapes the conditions of work (Beeghley). At this organization there have always been limited positions to be filled. Even when positions have been open, they have been reserved. Therefore the workers have few choices for mobility (Beeghley). When there have been opportunities for movement, they have been short climbs and rarely has there been significant upward mobility. The researcher asked Susan, "Do you anticipate upward movement for yourself in the company? "No!" cried Susan, "I’ve gotten quite use to what I do and feel apprehensive of change. For another, I know that I don’t possess the credential required for the more desirable position such as management. As large as the organization of the company is, it is politically bias and there is virtually no chance for any real mobility because opportunities are very limited."
As we have described, the micro-stratification of the department inherently delineates the jobs into different status rankings with their related power practices. Therefore, the micro-stratification structure affects how employees view their lifestyles and opportunities within the department. These issues have an important role in the operation in such a large bureaucratic company as the one studied here. In the next two sections, the importance of the micro-stratification system is analyzed more specifically regarding the ranking system and the power practices.
Ranking System
Description: Within this bureaucracy of organizing the hierarchy of job titles, the department has a formal system for the ranking of jobs. The formal system was created by management to classify the varying jobs according to grade levels (0-16, with 16 being the highest grade) to determine appropriate qualifications based on the assessment of work experiences, education, and competency skills. This system has been a very effective means of allocating the appropriate personnel and resources to match the job qualifications. Initially, this serves for hires outside of the company.
The department also has an informal system for promoting and hiring from within. Thus, most employees who occupy the core occupations have a lot of seniority. Even if they occupy a job that has a lower grade level than the next person, their seniority is a great indicator to assess their rank.
The researcher asked the Sales Representative, Jill, "Seeing that you’ve been with the company for 25 years now, how would you personally view issues of seniority and job security?" Jill replied, "I believe that seniority should exist. It has existed for a long time but for the last 5+ years it has vanished. Job security does exist in this organization in the sense that employees aren’t easily let go. This organization does provide the training in order to keep their employees informed and up-to-date with technology. However, it sucks how the company can easily hire an outsider to earn just as much as an employee who’s been working for 25 years."
As we can see, this informal ranking system based on seniority ultimately plays a more dominant role in how one viewed their rank within the system. Regardless of Jill’s low grade level 2, little education (G.E.D), and belief that seniority has done away with in recent years, her job security, influence and salary speak volumes for her integrity as part of an important employee of the company. This is probably why she has been with the company for so long.
Interaction: Between employees, the ranking system has a different subjective meaning. The personal interactions reflect how one perceives their job rank in relation to the other employees. The mannerism of the interactions between the Manager and the Sales Representatives, for the most part, have been professional (non-personal and work related). Last names of employees were used to address interactions either verbally, written, or via interoffice mail. Furthermore, the majority of the communications have been brief and to the point. Even during lunch where leisure time offers informal interactions, Terri seldom eats lunch with the department nor is she invited to have lunch with the group. She is usually seen having lunch with other department managers or even by herself in her office rather than with subordinates. This form of commensalism (Orleans, 1999) leads to the practice of indirect discrimination; "that is, they treat others unequally based on their background or other personal characteristics (Beeghley)."
This is not to say that personal interactions do not occur between different ranks because when it does occur, it has usually been in the form of "glad handing" (friendly fascism). Terri tries to make them feel like "one big happy family" (OBHF) when in fact, it is in her interest to benefit by maintaining the exploitation of the ranking system to preserve her own position (Orleans, 1999).
As one moves down the ranks, communications between similar ranks were observed to be more casual and personable. First names were used to address one another. Employees often discussed personal issues such as family, social activities, and gossips.
Analysis: The ranking system indirectly serves two functions: 1) occupational prestige (Beeghley) and 2) class identification (Beeghley). The hierarchy of occupational prestige assesses the social status (Orleans, 1999) of the jobs people have. Thus the interactions between employees have been in line with the prestige of the occupation. "The greater the skills required and the level of responsibility, the higher the prestige of an occupation (Beeghley)." The manager is accorded the respect and professionalism with the prestige of the position. In accordance to the ranking system, how one views their occupation prestige has a relational correspondence to their class identification (Beeghley).
Class identification is a determining factor to ascertain the status attainment (Beeghley) of that individual. How did that person come to occupy that position? Were they qualified for the position on achieved or ascribed factors (Beeghley)? "Patterns of class identification have a close correlation with occupation (Beeghley)." The manager sure did not qualify for the position without have achieved merits, credentials, or the social background which enabled such a climb to a management position. As we have discussed earlier, while the employees may not be able to objectify the classes, they can however see themselves as belonging to different classes and sense the implications this fact has for their lifestyles (Beeghley). These subtle differences impact the lifestyles of the different classes associated with their desired occupation. In a symbolic way, by identifying how they are ranked with one another, "the people who share common life-styles and values tend to discriminate against others who are different (Beeghly)."
Power Practices
Description: Inherent in any ranking system are the power practices of each hierarchical status group in relation to one another (Beeghley). Management wields the most power because it is highest in rank. It is the manager that does the hiring and firing, recommends salary increases and bonuses, communicates company policies and goals, and has the accountability for supervising the employees.
Below the manager are the five sales representatives. Although their powers are informal, they have considerable influences. Their input into departmental policies about promotions and marketing weighs heavily because they have the front-line experiences in dealing with their respective clients. Their powers are immediate over the support personnel. The support personnel have no power and minimal influence on suggestions/opinions.
Interactions: Issues of powerlessness have consistently been in line with the rank of the job. The researcher asked Lilly, "How do you view yourself as being an integral part of the department?" Lilly replied, "I have a very important job. I generate revenue producing leads and act as a right hand support for the on-flowing functions of the department." "Then you are telling me that you have a lot of power?" inquired the researcher. "Well, I wouldn’t classify it as power. My job is important in the sense that they depend on me. Actually, come to think of it, it’s not really a dependency issue, they more likely take full advantage of my existence," replied Lilly.
Analysis: The interaction of power can be best illustrated in the manager’s position. The position has the resources and capital to make appropriate changes to the functioning of the department. The responsibility to delegate power has enormous impact to the department and the company as a whole.
The researcher asked Terri, "As a minority (African American woman), how did you come about acquiring the management position?" Terri replied, "There’s no doubt that I am minority and a woman who holds a Manager position over a predominately ‘white-male’ department. I learned through some Black Association Research that this organization is one of the top 100 companies in the U.S. that is more liberal in this aspect. I have to admit though, I was lucky to get this job. Don’t get me wrong, I have my credentials, years of work experiences, and a network of relationships ("connections") that enabled me to qualify for this position. It’s a combination of who you know that gets you where you want to go. And of course, timing is important too."
As we move down the rank, others have less power until we have those with no power who are likely to be alienated (Beeghley) from their work. The researcher asked Lilly, "Are you included in bonuses?" Lilly replied, "No, it’s exclusive to sales, including General Assignment Rep; I only receive an annual 3% salary increase, same as everyone else."
Lilly views herself as being alienated from her work. She works just as hard if not harder, than those around her. While the dominant groups have been compensated for their hard work in terms of bonuses and recognition, Lilly has not been.
Conclusion
The study of hierarchical interaction by personally observing and interviewing the members of the Recruitment Classified Department revealed a correlation to the dimensions of social stratification. American society has its division of classes into the upper class, middle class, working class, and the poverty class. Intrinsic in any stratification lies the inherent power struggles that were noted in this study. Those who have the power, dominate and exploit others preventing them from acquiring power. The top two classes have the physical and human capital to their advantage. Up to this day, they have been operating in closed system.
This closed system has opened up its doors to some degree. The measurement of wealth has taken a decidedly different twist by the technological transformation. With it the status symbols of society have been changing. With dozens of millionaires born with every Internet IPO (initial purchase offer), the New Rich have defined themselves as the gatekeeper of information. Those who possess and control the information have the power and have gained this power rather quickly.
It is hoped that as the emergence of a new class (the intelligentsia class) develops that a move towards more equitable stratification structures may occur that does not discriminate against those who are relegated a so-called lower status than their colleagues. It would be interesting to see how the old class resolves to stratify classes of people according to their intelligence and education versus their physical work. In retrospect, the stratification of the department that was investigated mirrors that of the globalization of the economy.
References
Beeghley, L. (1996). The Structure of Social Stratification in the United States. (Needham Heights MA: Allyn & Bacon).
Orleans, M. (1999). Lecture notes from social stratification class, Spring Semester, California State University, Fullerton.