Formal relations are formed between people in the performance of certain production roles.

Formal relations are formed between people in the performance of certain production roles.

First, education differs fundamentally from spontaneous and relatively directed socialization in that it is based on social action. The German scientist Max Weber, who introduced this concept, defined it as an action aimed at solving problems; as an act specifically focused on the appropriate behavior of partners; as an act that involves a subjective understanding of possible behaviors of people with whom a person interacts.

Secondly, spontaneous socialization is a continuous process, because a person constantly interacts with society. Education is a discrete (interrupted) process, because, being planned, it is carried out in certain organizations, ie limited to a certain place and time.

However, we note that in the early stages of any society, education and socialization are syncretic (solid, indivisible).


Deacon B. Global Social Policy. Per. From English. – K., 1999. – 346 pp. Matvienko, V. Ya. Social technologies. K.: Ukr. propylaea, 2001. Nizhnik NR Public relations in a democratic society. – K., 1995 .– 206 pp. Sokolenko SI “Global markets of the XXI century: Prospects of Ukraine”. – K.: Logos, 1998. – 568 pp. Kholostova EI Technologists of social work. The student. – K.: Publishing house: Infra-M, 2003. – 400 pp. Shevchuk PI Social policy. – Lviv: Svit, 2003 .– 400 p.


The process of uniting the workforce: the role of communication. Abstract

Cognitive, communicative and regulatory functions of communication. Formal and informal relationships

Cognitive, communicative and regulatory functions of communication

Communication – the need of man, the most important condition of his work, the force that organizes and unites the team. In relation to the labor collective, communication is a form of interaction between team members, its groups in information (cognitive), emotional and active exchange, which results in the unity of their values, goals and behavior, so there is a cohesion of the team.

Communication as a means of uniting the workforce performs cognitive, communicative and regulatory functions.

Cognitive function is that members of a team or group, communicating, exchange information about themselves, their peers, ways and methods of solving problems. In the process of such exchange, each team member has the opportunity, comparing themselves with others, to critically evaluate their own actions and draw the right conclusions about their behavior, learn about more effective techniques and methods of work, to correlate their own style of performance with the general and perform so their work so that it complies with the rules and methods in force in this team.

The communicative function is that team members, communicating, form their own and general collective emotional state. Emotions – a person’s response to certain stimuli. Emotions affect the functional state of the human body, its efficiency. The work performed by a person is not only a means of obtaining material benefits, but also a starting point for the application of abilities, a means of satisfying not only material but also spiritual needs. Therefore, the slightest fluctuation of the production atmosphere causes a corresponding reaction in humans. Deprived of emotional balance, a person becomes a source of irritation to other people. And quarrels, insults reduce social activity, divide the team.

The regulatory function is manifested in the influence of team members on their co-workers, on their behavior, actions, activity, system of values. It regulates the interaction of team members and forms relationships to a greater extent vertically (in the system, the leader – a subordinate). An important role in shaping these relationships is played by the leader.

The implementation of these functions forms a certain system of relations in the team, which are divided into formal (business, official) and non-formal (personal, informal).

Formal and informal relationships

Formal relations are formed between people in the performance of certain production roles. They reflect the functional relationships between officials, employees of different categories and qualifications, managers and subordinates, which are based on norms, standards, rights and responsibilities. The content of formal relations is mutual demands, responsibility, friendly cooperation, mutual assistance, competition.

In each labor collective, along with formal relations, there are also informal relations, the microstructure of the collective. They also arise from the functional connections between a team member, but on the basis of their individual and personal qualities and are expressed in the assessment of these qualities. These relationships can arise between friends and enemies, comrades and acquaintances, friends and enemies, both in terms of formal and informal functions. The basis of informal relations are inclinations and rejections, rapprochement and distancing, likes and dislikes.

The relations of people in this system are determined by their place in the production structure of the team – they treat each other as a director to his deputy, as a master to the worker, as a worker to the same worker, etc., but they treat each other and as individuals with their own likes, dislikes, aspirations, inclinations. The presence and interaction in each team of formal and informal relations causes many problems for its cohesion, which necessitates a detailed study of informal relations.


Sociology of labor and management: main categories. Abstract

Mechanism and levels of theorizing. The main categories of sociology of labor and sociology of management

Mechanism and levels of theorizing

Any social phenomenon or behavioral act can be interpreted in many ways (this number is not infinite, but at the same time it can not be called fundamentally closed). This means that as science evolves, new ways of interpreting people’s behavior will appear in organized communities, or more simply, in organizations.

The open nature of the number of theoretical interpretations of behavior is explained by the open nature of our experience, on which the theory itself is based. In turn, the open nature includes not only advantages. Thus, the expressions “conflict marriage”, “collegial style” or “labor adaptation” in different cultures vary in meaning.

In order to give a theoretical interpretation, one had to know what the role, status, power or norm of elaboration meant. They can be understood in different ways, putting different meanings or reducing them to some purely mundane ideas. The notions of role or power must be taken out of the real context, isolated from everyday accumulations and included in the new context. It is called a theoretical system in which old terms acquire new, ideal-typical connections, receive a different status and a different name – ideal constructs.

Only new theoretical concepts can be operationalized, reduced to a set of studied features or measured indicators. Unfortunately, in his practical activity, developing a program and research tools, the sociologist operationalizes what can not and should not be operationalized, ie abstract concepts that are immersed in our everyday experience and cultural context, but have not yet been translated into the language of theoretical systems. We call such “naive” procedures theorizing. Mixing scientific and everyday theorizing does not bring the sociologist closer to the ideal of accurate knowledge, the norms of academic discipline.

There are two most important procedures – description and research, which are attributes of scientific activity. Research is more than just a questioning process.

Sociological research is primarily a test of hypotheses, rather than gathering information on a given topic. It is not the competence or quality of the questionnaire that is checked here, but the correspondence between the theoretical model and the real world.

The theoretical level of sociological research has its own specifics and differs significantly from empirical knowledge. The decisive feature of theoretical research is its focus on the improvement and development of conceptual tools of science, the movement in the layer of ideal-abstract objects and schemes. On the contrary, empirical research is defined as the application to an objective reality that lies outside the system of concepts of ready-made mental means. characteristic feature of a theoretical act is that it is not only a reflection of an object, but also a reflection, an awareness of the process of reflection. And in this sense, sociological knowledge includes in its structure (implicitly and explicitly) methodological norms and principles. The conceptual apparatus is based on the intersection of these two hyperplanes of the cognitive process.

A distinctive feature of theoretical reflection is its biomodality, which means the ability to simultaneously reflect what belongs to the subject and what belongs to the object. Thus, in sociology, the language of the researcher (subject) and the respondent (object) must be clearly separated in the development of labor issues. At the same time, methodological prohibitions such as “the interviewer should not impose his opinion on the object” organize not only the technology of the researcher, but also the logic of the theory.

The main categories of sociology of labor and sociology of management

A fundamental feature of sociology in general, and the sociology of labor and management in particular, is the duality of methodological status. Sociology arose from the field of philosophical knowledge, and to a large extent this somewhat specific dependence on philosophy persists today. On the other hand, sociology is aimed at solving specific problems, the behavior of social groups and individuals. This is the source of quantitative methodology, the practice of empirical research and applied technologies.

Thus, in the sociology of labor and management, such specificity is even more pronounced. Its subject – social work – can be adequately understood both as a sociological category and as an empirical reality of human behavior at the same time.