Functional Differentiation and the Structure of Informal Groups

Abstract

IN CURRENT definitions of social structure, one particular difference in emphasis appears outstanding. Stogdill, for example, emphasizes differentiation and interdependence of parts when he says: By structure is meant that the system is so differentiated or ordered that member A is not identical with member B, and the reaction of A to B is not identical with the reaction of B to A. 1 In a somewhat broader frame of reference, Johnson, on the other hand, places primary emphasis on the element of continuity or relative permanence when he says, 'structure' of anything consists of the relatively stable interrelationships among its parts; moreover, the term 'part' itself implies a certain degree of stability. 2 This latter characteristic-stability-Stogdill refers to as identity because it is this characteristic which permits the system to be recognized as the same group during successive periods of observation. 3 The central tendencies of these and similar definitions can be expressed in a definition of structure as a stable pattern of relationships among differentiated parts. Differences in emphasis suggest, however, that such a definition contains two key elements: differentiation of function on the one hand, and consistency in the allocation of these functions on the other.