Social mobility: essence, types, factors. The essence of social mobility

Society these days is developing at a rapid pace. This leads to the emergence of new positions, a significant increase in the number of social movements, their speed and frequency.

What's happened

Sorokin Pitirim was the first to study such a concept as social mobility. Today, many researchers continue the work he began, since its relevance is very great.

Social mobility is expressed in the fact that the position of a particular person in the hierarchy of groups, in his relation to the means of production, in the division of labor and in general in the system of production relations is significantly transformed. This change is associated with the loss or acquisition of property, the transition to new position, obtaining an education, mastering a profession, getting married, etc.

People are in constant motion, and society is constantly evolving. This indicates the variability of its structure. The totality of all social movements, that is, changes in an individual or group, is included in the concept of social mobility.

Examples in history

Since ancient times, this topic has been relevant and aroused interest. For example, the unexpected fall of a person or his rise is a favorite plot of many folk tales: a wise and cunning beggar becomes a rich man; hardworking Cinderella finds a rich prince and marries him, thereby increasing her prestige and status; the poor prince suddenly becomes a king.

However, the movement of history is determined mainly not by individuals, not by their social mobility. Social groups are what is more important to her. The landed aristocracy, for example, was replaced at a certain stage by the financial bourgeoisie; from modern production, people with low-skilled professions are being forced out by “white collar” workers - programmers, engineers, operators. Revolutions and wars reshaped the top of the pyramid, raising some and lowering others. Such changes in Russian society occurred, for example, in 1917, after the October Revolution.

Let us consider the various grounds on which social mobility can be divided and its corresponding types.

1. Social mobility intergenerational and intragenerational

Any movement of a person between or layers means his mobility down or up within the social structure. Note that this may concern one generation or two or three. The change in the position of children compared to the positions of their parents is evidence of their mobility. On the contrary, social stability occurs when a certain position of generations is preserved.

Social mobility can be intergenerational (intergenerational) and intragenerational (intragenerational). In addition, there are 2 main types of it - horizontal and vertical. In turn, they fall into subtypes and subspecies, closely related to each other.

Intergenerational social mobility means an increase or, conversely, a decrease in the status in society of representatives of subsequent generations in relation to the status of the current one. That is, children achieve a higher or lower position in society than their parents. For example, if the son of a miner becomes an engineer, we can talk about intergenerational upward mobility. And the downward trend is observed if the son of a professor works as a plumber.

Intragenerational mobility is a situation in which the same person, beyond comparison with his parents, changes his position in society several times throughout his life. This process is otherwise called a social career. A turner, for example, can become an engineer, then a shop manager, then he can be promoted to plant director, after which he can take the position of minister of the engineering industry.

2. Vertical and horizontal

Vertical mobility is the movement of an individual from one stratum (or caste, class, estate) to another.

Depending on the direction of this movement, upward mobility (upward movement, social ascent) and downward mobility (downward movement, social descent) are distinguished. For example, promotion is an example of upward mobility, while demotion or dismissal is an example of downward movement.

The concept of horizontal social mobility means that an individual moves from any social group to another, located on the same level. Examples include moving from a Catholic to an Orthodox religious group, changing citizenship, moving from one’s parental family to one’s own, from one profession to another.

Geographic mobility

Geographic social mobility is a type of horizontal mobility. It does not mean a change in group or status, but a move to another place while maintaining the same social status. An example is interregional and international tourism, moving and back. Geographic social mobility in modern society is also a transition from one company to another while maintaining status (for example, accountant).

Migration

We have not yet considered all the concepts related to the topic of interest to us. The theory of social mobility also highlights migration. We talk about it when a change of status is added to a change of place. For example, if a village resident came to the city to visit his relatives, then geographic mobility occurs. However, if he moved here for permanent place residence, started working in the city, then this is migration.

Factors influencing horizontal and vertical mobility

Note that the nature of horizontal and vertical social mobility of people is influenced by age, gender, mortality and birth rates, and population density. Men, and young people in general, are more mobile than older people and women. In overpopulated states, emigration is higher than immigration. Places with high birth rates have younger populations and are therefore more mobile. Young people are more likely to have professional mobility, older people - political mobility, and adults - economic mobility.

The birth rate is not equally distributed across classes. As a rule, the lower classes have more children, and the upper classes have fewer. The higher a person rises on the social ladder, the fewer children he has. Even if every son of a rich man takes the place of his father, voids will still form in the social pyramid, at its upper steps. They are filled by people from lower classes.

3. Social mobility group and individual

There are also group and individual mobility. Individual is the movement of a particular individual up, down or horizontally along the social ladder, regardless of other people. Group mobility is movement up, down or horizontally along the social ladder of a certain group of people. For example, after the revolution, the old class is forced to cede its dominant position to the new one.

Group and individual mobility are connected in a certain way with achieved and ascribed statuses. In this case, the individual corresponds to a greater extent with the achieved status, and the group - with the ascribed one.

Organized and structured

These are the basic concepts of the topic that interests us. When considering the types of social mobility, organized mobility is sometimes also distinguished, when the movement of an individual or groups down, up or horizontally is controlled by the state, both with and without the consent of people. Organized voluntary mobility includes socialist organizational recruitment, conscription for construction sites, etc. Involuntary - dispossession and resettlement of small nations during the period of Stalinism.

Structural mobility, caused by changes in the very structure of the economy, should be distinguished from organized mobility. It occurs beyond the consciousness and will of individual people. For example, social mobility of a society is greater when professions or industries disappear. In this case, large masses of people move, and not just individuals.

For clarity, let us consider the conditions for increasing a person’s status in two subspaces - professional and political. Any ascent of a government official career ladder reflected as a change in rank in the state hierarchy. You can also increase your political weight by increasing your rank in the party hierarchy. If the official belongs to the number of activists or functional members of the party that became ruling after parliamentary elections, then he has a much greater chance of occupying a leadership position in the municipal or government controlled. And, of course, the professional status of an individual will increase after he receives a diploma of higher education.

Mobility intensity

The theory of social mobility introduces such a concept as the intensity of mobility. This is the number of individuals who change their social positions horizontally or vertically over a certain period of time. The number of such individuals in is the absolute intensity of mobility, while their share in the total number of this community is relative. For example, if we count the number of people under 30 who are divorced, then there is an absolute intensity of mobility (horizontal) in this age category. However, if we consider the ratio of the number of divorced people under the age of 30 to the number of all individuals, this will already be relative mobility in the horizontal direction.

Social mobility- any transition of an individual or social object from one social position to another. Social objects - fashion, television, etc.

There are two types of social mobility: horizontal and vertical. Horizontal social mobility is the transition of an individual from one social group to another located at the same level. Vertical is the movement of an individual or social object from one layer to another.

Mobility happens ascending(social uplift), or descending ↓

It happens the same way voluntary(voluntary movement of individuals within the social hierarchy), or structural social mobility, which is dictated by certain changes in the economy or structural social changes.

The systematic study of social mobility, primarily vertical, began in America in the 50s of the last century.

Social factors ial mobility:

1) Economic development

2) Social system

3) Advanced technology

4) Wars and revolutions

5) Different level birth rate in different countries

6) Education system

7) Conscious effort of the individual

Social mobility can lead to alienation and social instability in society.

/////////The term social mobility was introduced by P.A. Sorokin in 1927

Social m-t - a change by an individual or a group of persons of the place occupied in the social structure, or a movement from one social stratum to another.

Vertical. m-th - movement from one stratum (estate, class) to another.

Rising - social rise, upward movement (promotion in position).

Descending - social descent, downward movement (demotion).

Horizon m-t - the transition of an individual from one social network. group to another, located at the same level (moving from Orthodox to Catholic religious group, from one citizenship to another). Such movements occur without noticeable changes in social life. position in the vertical direction. Geographical - moving from one place to another while maintaining the same status (international and interregional tourism, moving from city to village and back). Migration is moving from one place to another with a change in status (a person moved to a city for permanent residence and changed his profession).

Intergenerational motherhood - a comparative change in social status among different generations (the son of a worker becomes president). Intragenerational m-th (social career) - a change in status within one generation (a turner becomes an engineer, then a workshop manager, then a plant director). On the vertical. and horizon factors are influenced by gender, age, birth rate, death rate, and population density.

In general, factors of social mobility can be divided into: 1) micro-level - directly social. the individual’s environment, as well as his total life resource. 2) macro level - the state of the economy, the level of scientific and technological development, the nature of politics. regime, prevailing stratification system, character natural conditions etc.

Sometimes organized and structural structures are distinguished. Organiz. m-t - the movement of people or entire groups up, down or horizontally is controlled by the state with the consent of the people themselves or without their consent. Struct. m-th - change in the structure of the national economy. It occurs beyond the will and consciousness of individual individuals. Social channels M-ti: army, church, education, marriage, politics. and prof. organizations.

1.Definition and types of social mobility

2. History of the study of social mobility

3.Factors of social mobility

4. Scope of mobility institutions

The term “social mobility,” like many other sociological terms, has already “taken root” in everyday language, journalistic language. Everyone has a rough idea of ​​what it is. Only most often “mobility” is understood as a career take-off, an increase in income and other changes in a person’s status that are significant for modern urban culture. However, the category of “social mobility” is much broader; it covers a large layer of social phenomena, the study of which allows us to understand a lot about modern society. The purpose of the lecture is to understand the theory of social mobility and show the opportunities that addressing this topic opens up.

1. Definition and types of social mobility

The term “social mobility” refers to any movement in the social structure, any change in social status. The main types of mobility and their definitions are given in dictionary boxes 1, 2, 3.

Modern society is so complex and diverse in structure, in the opportunities for self-realization that are given to a person, that we can talk about many types of mobility. When you get an education, change your place of residence, get married, get a new position at work - the sociologist qualifies all these events as cases of social mobility: educational, geographical ( migration), family, professional.

The study of social mobility is grounded in theory social stratification, since it is impossible without understanding the structure of society, knowledge of the grounds on which it is formed inequality between people and groups. In modern society, the main axes of stratification, as you already know, are:

§Economic axis – inequality of income and property.

§Professional axis – inequality of official status and prestige of the profession.

§Political axis – inequality of power.

In addition to the above, information inequality is becoming increasingly important, which is associated with unequal access to educational opportunities, receiving and using information resource, but we’ll talk about this in more detail later.

Movements and social mobility can occur along each of the axes of inequality. It could be upward vertical mobility, the most obvious and widespread example of which is career, an increase in position, which is most often accompanied by an increase in income and an increase in prestige. Maybe downward vertical mobility associated, for example, with job loss, unemployment when a person temporarily loses his source of income and professional status.

The above examples of mobility clearly demonstrate another feature of movements in modern society: different types of mobility are interconnected, a change in status along one axis of stratification is, as a rule, accompanied by a change in other status positions. These changes are not always unidirectional (job growth = income growth); it also happens the other way around. Mass examples similar multidirectional mobility was encountered in Russia in the 1990s, when the Soviet employment system collapsed, payment delays wages became a widespread phenomenon and many solved the problem of earnings by changing their profession to a less prestigious one.

In one of our studies, there was an example of a family in which both husband and wife deliberately chose this strategy: they left their jobs as engineers at a prestigious research institute and got a job in completely non-prestigious, blue-collar, but regularly and well-paid positions (she was a cleaner for a successful enterprise , he is a railroad worker). It was difficult psychologically, it changed my lifestyle, but it helped me get through the most difficult years. In the example above, we can see several stages of mobility:

1. At first, even without visible changes in status (neither place of work nor position has changed), we observe downward vertical mobility along the income axis. This type of mobility is called group structural mobility, since the change in status is not individual, but occurs together with a professional group for reasons beyond the control of people, due to changes at the macro level.

2.Then – transition to another job with upward vertical mobility along the income axis and downward upward mobility along the axes of profession prestige and job status. This is multidirectional mobility.

During periods of social change, significant shifts in the social structure, mobility always becomes more intense. On the one hand, as we have seen, during such periods factors are activated that act against the will of people, structural factors. The above example demonstrates, rather, the negative effect of these factors, but times of change always open up more opportunities for growth. And here another factor is needed - initiative, activity of the people themselves who want to “climb the social ladder.”

The most widespread processes of mobility in the 20th century were associated with the action of economic factors - first, the industrialization of the economy, the development of large-scale industries, then the turn towards informatization, the growing economic role of knowledge and an increase in the share of highly skilled labor. Such major changes in the economy, in the very nature of the economic system, inevitably change the structure of employment: new professions appear, the numerical ratio of existing ones changes. Professions such as system administrator, numerical control machine operator, marketer, manager, personnel development specialist, and many others simply did not exist several decades ago. The structure is changing, and as a result, new opportunities for vertical mobility are being created.

Such changes, as a rule, are evolutionary, require relatively long periods of time and affect, first of all, not the individual, but the intergenerational mobility. This is another type of mobility; it characterizes not changes in the status of one person throughout life, but a change in the status of children, compared to the status of parents. For example, in the 1960-1970s, many children of parents engaged in manual labor (workers, peasants) received higher education and became qualified specialists and managers. This process was widespread not only in our country, but also in all developed countries. In the 1990-2000s, the development of the service sector opened up new opportunities for intergenerational mobility, however, not as intense as during the period of industrialization.

So, social mobility, as you can see, is diverse in types and directions, and is influenced by a complex set of factors. The study of social mobility is a fascinating activity, because behind the dry numbers about the frequency and intensity of movements there are always human destinies, human desires and hopes, and understanding the processes of social mobility allows us to learn a lot about the society in which we live.

2. History of the study of social mobility

For the first time, social mobility as an object of comprehensive study is presented in the book of the great Russian sociologist Pitirim Aleksandrovich Sorokin “Social mobility: its forms and fluctuations.” The work was published in 1927, it is one of the first major works after his emigration to the United States, and to this day it is a classic, seminal publication on the topic of social mobility. P.A. Sorokin gives a definition of social mobility, considers its main forms and characteristics (direction, intensity, universality).

Based on rich historical material P.A. Sorokin analyzes the mobility of the elite of societies - rulers, church leaders, military commanders. Compares different types societies, such as the caste system of India and the class structure of the United States. At the same time, the difference in the intensity of mobility is clearly visible: among the 29 US presidents, 14 (i.e. 48.3%) came from poor or middle-class families, while in India, people from lower strata in the ruling groups are isolated exceptions (of course, these are count to the 1920s of the XX century). This type of society, like in India, with disabilities mobility is called closed societies, and the USA is an example open society.

Of course, there are no absolutely open or closed societies. Even in the most closed society there are examples of people who, due to their activity, talents, and perseverance, move to the heights of power or wealth. And any open mobility system involves some barriers for those who want to get to the top. P.A. Sorokin introduced the concept and analyzed the action mobility institutes (lifts). These are social institutions and organizations that, on the one hand, open up the possibilities of social mobility, but they also limit it, differentiating individuals, letting only some of them “up.”

P.A. Sorokin examines in detail such institutions of mobility as the army, church, family, education, professional groups. IN different periods Over time, these institutions provide opportunities for people from “the bottom” to experience upward mobility. For example, even in a medieval closed class society, the church allowed people of different origins to advance and occupy the highest positions: the scientist calculated that the share of Roman Catholic popes who came from the poorest classes was 19.4%, from the middle classes - 18, 8. However, he notes that the closer to modern times, the more closed the church became, the less pronounced its role as an institution of mobility turned out to be. Actually, the church loses this role towards the industrial stage of society’s development, and the importance of other institutions of mobility increases: education, professional and economic organizations.

Research on mobility in modern society began to be actively carried out in the middle of the 20th century. The studies of P. Blau and O. Duncan, S. Lipset and R. Bendix have become classic. These studies included large representative population surveys and answered the same questions as P.A. Sorokina, questions, only based on modern material: what is the intensity of mobility, what factors determine the activity of movements, within the framework of what institutions they occur.

For example, a classic study from the 50s and 60s by Duncan and Blau, the results of which they published in the book Occupational Structure in America, analyzed intergenerational occupational mobility. Sociologists were interested in the question of how much influence a person’s origin has on the opportunity to get a more prestigious and highly paid job than his father. The study revealed that origin influences mobility primarily through a basic level of education that parents can provide to a person.

The most famous modern researcher of social mobility is the English sociologist John Goldthorpe. In 1972 he carried out a large-scale study of male mobility in Great Britain. In 1983, the study was repeated and refined, in particular, it was no longer only about men, but also about women as full participants in the labor market and mobility processes; family status was determined by the status of the main breadwinner. The study tests hypotheses put forward by Goldthorpe's predecessors in the study of British mobility. One of them is the idea of ​​\u200b\u200bthe closed upper strata of society, which arises due to the desire of the elite to prevent representatives of other groups from enjoying their privileges. Goldthorpe's study did not support this hypothesis. He found that there was a fairly large influx of representatives of other social groups into the upper class. And children of the upper class very often experience downward mobility relative to the position of their fathers, but for them this is most often a temporary position. Starting their careers at the level of small clerks, they, as a rule, reach the same high social status, like their fathers to adulthood.

Modern works J. Goldthorpe and colleagues are written based on data from large longitudinal studies, the last measurements of which occurred in the early 2000s. Goldthorpe analyzes mobility between seven classes, which are distinguished on the basis of criteria of market position and position in labor relations. Essentially, he defines classes through profession and ranks them from the lowest position (unskilled labor) to the highest (highly skilled professionals and managers). Goldthorpe notes that modern society is open in nature - the level of mobility is very high, but at the same time the ratio of upward and downward mobility almost the same. This means that the impulse of upward mobility, associated with an increase in demand for specialists and managers, has already “exhausted”, and society has come to some balance. The problem is that over several decades society has become accustomed to active upward mobility, an achievement ideology, a desire to promote steel important value, part of a lifestyle, and limited opportunities for upward mobility can cause frustration and social dissatisfaction.

In Russia, research on social structure and mobility intensified during the period of economic transformation in the 1990s. We can name several major studies that in one way or another touch on the topic of social mobility: “Socio-economic adaptation of the population” (research conducted in 1994 and 2004), “Changing Russia: formation new system stratification" (2003, repeated in 2005), "Monitoring of social and economic changes" (regular research by VTsIOM). The results of these studies can be found in the publications of N.E. Tikhonova, N.M. Davydova, E.M. Avraamova and others.

Social mobility in these projects is analyzed from the point of view of subjective assessments of changes in status. The data from these studies demonstrate that the economic transformations of the 1990s led primarily to increased downward mobility: in 1994-97, only 12-17% noted an increase in status compared to the past, and a decrease in status was felt by 35-45% . In the early 2000s, the situation changed - already one in four experienced upward mobility (note, however, that the study was conducted only in cities, and the situation in rural areas may be completely different).

Another focus of interest for Russian researchers is studying how new groups are formed. From what social groups, for example, do workers come to new professions, on what “social material” does a group of entrepreneurs emerge, who forms the layer of “new poor”, at the expense of which groups is the middle class formed. All these processes of the formation of new social structures cannot be analyzed without turning to the topic of social mobility.

So far we have been talking about quantitative research , but a completely different approach to mobility research is possible. This is a method of analyzing family history. In this case, the sociologist is interested not only in formal indicators of changes in social status, but also in what cultural and social resources (values, life principles who are raised in a family) younger generation receives from the senior how these resources influence the transition to another group. Notable work Daniel and Isabel Berto - classic sample such research. Analyzing five generations of one family, they show how changes in society and the economy are changing occupations and ways of earning money, but family values and resources continue to be passed on from generation to generation and constitute a kind of “family style” of adaptation to social change.

A similar study of the history of families coming from different social strata was carried out in Russia. The results were published in the book “The Fates of People: Russia in the 20th Century.” (1996)

3. Factors of social mobility

Society, as we have already noted, at different stages of development provides unequal mobility opportunities for its members. The chances of mobility for a particular person depend on many factors that can be considered at several levels.

Macro level - type social system, stage of socio-economic development. Two examples of societies that sociologists like to look at are caste system medieval India and modern Western society. The first type is closest to an absolutely closed society, when birth into a certain caste predetermines a person’s social position, and it is almost impossible to go beyond the boundaries of one’s caste. Modern Western society is closest to an open stratification system when the chances of mobility are great.

If we remember the famous “American Dream,” then this is precisely the dream of a society of equal opportunity, of a society where every shepherd can become a millionaire or, at a minimum, achieve a standard of well-being that includes own house, a car for each family member and stable income. For some time it seemed that such a society really existed, and this was proof of the progressiveness of the Western model of capitalism and democracy. Note, however, that the wide opportunities for social mobility in Western societies are associated not so much with open electoral system, as with a rapidly developing industrial economy. In the USSR, traditionally considered as an example closed society, there were similar processes of mobility: a massive transition from the category of manual workers to the category of highly qualified intellectual professionals, the possibility of quick careers from worker to production manager. It is industrialization and scientific and technological revolution predetermined powerful flows of upward vertical mobility, characteristic of all economically developed and developing countries.

At the same time, economies (especially leading Western countries) grew in size: the volume of national wealth increased, and along with it, family incomes grew. At the same time, social spending increased, and social programs, including those to support the poor, became widespread. All these factors have led to a flattening of wealth inequality. For example, in the United States, the share of the top 1% of the country's total wealth fell from 36.3% in 1929 to 17.6% in 1976.

New technologies, cheaper production of products and household items also made it possible to improve the quality of life (let us note once again that similar processes occurred not only in the West, but also in the USSR, although to a lesser extent). During this time, a consumer society emerged (sometimes the term “affluent society” was used), a measure social success in which – precisely the level of consumption. Indeed, in the lives of several generations, a stable trend continued: children almost always lived better than their parents in terms of consumption, income and availability of goods. And this situation has become familiar.

Since the late 1970s, inequality has begun to increase again in developed countries. If we return to the same example about the share of national wealth owned by the richest 1%, then by 1995 it increased again and amounted to 39%, i.e. all the achievements of the “society of equal opportunities” were leveled. Why did this happen? The economy began to change dramatically with the transition to the stage of a post-industrial, high-tech society, and traditional sectors and industry began to experience crisis after crisis; accordingly, the wages of a significant number of workers, workers with a low level of education, decreased. In addition, changes in the economy do not occur painlessly; they are accompanied by crises, witnesses, and to a certain extent, we became subjects of one of them in 2008-2009.

The crises of the last two decades are perceived so painfully by many both here and in Western countries precisely because the growth of consumption seemed limitless, as well as the possibility of constant growth in status. But, as new research notes, this stage is over, and social mobility has stabilized. For the coming decades, unless a new technological breakthrough occurs, economists predict the stability of the leading economies, and therefore there is no need to expect increased social mobility.

Another macro factor that dramatically changes everything social structure and for a time opens up virtually limitless opportunities for social mobility - these are revolutions. Another P.A. Sorokin, analyzing the 1917 revolution in Russia, comparing it with the Great French Revolution, revolutions in other countries, wrote: “A revolution reminds me of a major earthquake that turns upside down all the layers in the territory of a geological cataclysm. Never during normal periods Russian society“did not know such strong vertical mobility.” Over the course of several years of the revolution, representatives of " ruling class"were actually destroyed, the Bolsheviks - before the revolution - marginalized and underground, having come to power by force, sharply increased their social status. Then, in accordance with the idea of ​​the “dictatorship of the proletariat,” the status of some groups (workers, soldiers) was increased, while other groups (industrialists, religious leaders, nobles, etc.) very quickly lost all the advantages of their previous status, i.e. experienced vertical downward mobility.

4. Scope of mobility institutions

Let us recall that the function of mobility institutions is to create opportunities for vertical movements and regulate them, i.e. the creation of certain “filters” - rules and procedures with the help of which “candidates” are selected for further promotion. In modern society there are several key institutions for social mobility.

1. Education. The increasing role of the educational institution was noted by P.A. Sorokin. Since the 1950s, when first the scientific and technological revolution took place, and later the process of informatization of the economy, the role of education, first of all, high school, intensified.

Since then, sociology has established the point of view that education is the main factor influencing further professional success and income level. In all mobility studies, the level of education is necessarily taken into account as one of the key indicators. The empirical criteria that are used are the number of years spent on education and the quality and prestige of the education received.

As a channel of social mobility, education acts in two ways. On the one hand, the “volume” of education received can be considered as social capital, which can later be “invested” and realized as a resource when applying for a job or career advancement. On the other hand, the education system is the first institution of differentiation that a person encounters during his life. Modern school, and especially higher education educational establishments constantly evaluate students, stimulate competition between them, and thus identify “promising” and “successful” ones at an early stage. This function of education has been criticized more than once, but it generally corresponds to the model of a society based on an achievement culture.

So, education becomes a condition for obtaining a decent professional status, good income and at the same time a “simulator” for career strategies, the first social institution, which accustoms children to external evaluation, to the dependence of grades on their own efforts (at least ideally), to the fact that people are not equal in their abilities and results.

Here are a few facts demonstrating the influence of education on social mobility in modern society. While in 1979, young people who graduated from high school earned 23% more money than those without a high school education, by 1989 this gap had grown to 43%; College graduates, who earned 42 percent more in 1979 than those with only a high school education, widened the gap to 65 percent in 1989. These are data for the United States, but similar processes occurred in all developed countries. In Russia, the process began a little later, but the result is the same: in the 1990s, the relative difference in wages between workers with general secondary and higher education is 60-70%.

But at the same time, both in Russia and in the West, higher education is gradually losing its role as an unconditional resource for mobility. The reason is simple: more and more people have graduated from universities, and Russia is among the world leaders in this indicator - 21% of the population have higher education. Taking into account the increase in the number of universities and students studying in them (now almost 2/3 of high school graduates enter a university), in the near future more than half of the workers on the labor market will present this resource. Already, higher education is being devalued, many university graduates work below their qualifications - secretaries and sales consultants with higher education are probably familiar to each of you. But this does not mean that education has completely lost its role as an institution of mobility. The point today is that it is not enough to get an education once in youth and then use it as a permanent resource; in the information society, education becomes continuous - a second higher education, seminars and advanced training courses; professionals learn virtually constantly. And it is precisely this model of education (“Long live learning”) that promotes upward mobility and allows you to be successful.

2. Family. This institution of social mobility is the most important in all types of societies, but its effect is changing. In a traditional, pre-industrial society, the main mechanism of family influence is direct inheritance of the parental fortune, and a common way to increase one’s status is through an advantageous marriage. In an industrial society, the object of inheritance is no longer so much material values, how many models of professional success, growth values.

For example, parents have a great influence on their children's educational choices. As one of our studies showed, families with parents with higher or secondary education special education, orient their children towards mandatory receipt higher education. A profession as such is transmitted to the future generation very rarely; more often there is an intergenerational transition from technical to humanitarian specialties, but obtaining a good education is mandatory. A typical phrase from one interview: “Parents said, study, otherwise you will go to work as a janitor”.

In modern society, education is the resource that parents strive to pass on to their children, strengthening the influence of the family on their future status. P. Bourdieu also drew attention to another relationship between the institutions of education and the family: it is during student times that most acquaintances with future spouses occur, or, at a minimum, a social circle is formed in which people later find a marriage partner. Thus, the mechanism of indirect inheritance of status operates: parents, without directly influencing the choice of a marriage partner by their children, provide their children with the “right” circle of friends and the opportunity to choose a future spouse from “their circle.”

3. Labor market and enterprise. Since in modern society a person’s status and his income in most cases depend on professional success, and mobility is associated mainly with a professional career, the labor market and organization become the most important institutions of mobility.

Stereotypical image successful person– getting a job in a good organization and climbing the “job ladder.” This is the dream of many, and indeed, in industrial societies, this is the strategy that has typically led to upward mobility. But now the situation is changing: when analyzing the labor market, sociologists note several important trends.

Firstly, people are increasingly changing jobs, and permanent employment long work in one company become more rare. This is due both to the position of employers who prefer to enter into temporary contracts in order to encourage workers to constantly confirm their qualifications and develop, and to the position of workers who are looking for Better conditions labor, higher pay and are ready to change jobs for this.

Secondly, there is an increasing influence globalization labor market: increasingly, moving to another job means not just changing the employer company, but moving to another city or even another country. Traditional centers of gravity work force– USA, EU countries and Australia – in last years supplemented by the countries of the Persian Gulf, actively developing countries of Asia and Latin America. Russia is also becoming the largest center of labor migration, primarily from countries former USSR. In 2006, the number of labor migration to Russia exceeded 1 million people from 40 countries, with an even more massive flow of illegal migrants (according to experts, 4-6 million people).

And finally, temporary unemployment is becoming increasingly widespread. As U. Beck notes, in Germany, about 1/3 of the employed have ever been unemployed. Thus, new labor markets, on the one hand, open up many opportunities for changing jobs, but on the other hand, they cannot give a person confidence in stable employment.

In general, labor mobility remains intense, but its trajectories are becoming more diverse, and each person can choose different strategies - whether to pursue a career in one company, change jobs, or start their own business. W. Beck notes that mobility institutions now have less and less influence on individual movements; they set opportunities and conditions, but mobility trajectories depend increasingly on a person’s independent efforts and motivation.

Motivation and individual efforts of people are the third level of factors influencing social mobility after the macro and institutional levels. As we have already noted, different societies provide different opportunities for mobility, but ultimately upward mobility depends on the person himself, his activity, his efforts.

For a long time motivation for social mobility was associated with achievement culture common in Western industrial societies - the desire for success, part of which is upward mobility, career and increased income. However, as we have already indicated, the situation is changing: the values ​​of self-development, rather than career, are becoming increasingly important. Ronald Inglegart, based on large-scale research, concludes that in developed Western societies, materialistic values ​​and an achievement culture are being replaced by post-materialistic values. The essence of this cultural shift is that what is now more important is not the value of economic success, the growth of consumption; People are increasingly devoting a significant portion of their energy to providing benefits other than just income, such as status and quality of life. A change in values ​​does not mean that the motivation for mobility disappears, it is transformed - the desire for positive changes in life remains the most important driving force for people’s social activity, but other types of mobility are stimulated.

In recent decades, there has been an increasing flow of people leaving corporations to work independently - small businesses, self-employment, freelance work, i.e. independently offering your services and working under a temporary contract. At the same time, people often change their profession, making a hobby their profession or receiving additional education.

Labor mobility has been increasing in recent decades, but increasingly it is not vertical mobility, not promotion, but horizontal mobility– changing profession, going into self-employment, often without clear prospects of receiving a high income or even with the exact knowledge that the level of income will be lower. What motivates these people? Some want freedom and independence to try to achieve everything on their own, others are tired of participating in the “career race”. In recent years, a phenomenon called “downshifting” has been developing in developed countries - a conscious change in lifestyle based on reducing the importance of income in decision-making, including leaving for a less prestigious but quieter job or self-employment, which allows you to devote less time to work than when working for hire. According to research results from the mid-1990s, about a quarter of the population of the USA, Great Britain, and Australia call themselves “downshifters.” In reality, of course, not all of them experience downward social mobility, but the idea of ​​​​the need to reduce the time devoted to work is spreading more and more widely.

LITERATURE

1. Berto D., Berto-William I. Inheritance and family // Issues of sociology. 1992. No. 2

2. Radaev V.V., Shkaratan O.I. Social stratification. - M., 1996. Section. 3 “Social mobility and reproduction”

3. Sorokin P.A. Man, civilization, society. - M., 1992. Section. "Social stratification and mobility".

4. Social stratification of the age cohort. Graduates of the 80s in the post-Soviet space. - M., 1997

5. The destinies of people: Russia XX century. Family biographies as an object sociological research. - M., 1996

6. Tikhonova N.E. Social stratification in modern Russia: experience of empirical analysis. - M.: Institute of Sociology RAS, 2007

7. Shkaratan O.I., Ivanov I.M., Inyasevsky S.A. Analysis of socio-economic inequality of Russians // Social Sciences and Modernity - 2006, No. 5-6

8. Shkaratan I.I. The formation of post-Soviet neo-ethacracy // ONS. 2009. No. 1.

9. Shkaratan I.I. Expectations and reality. Social mobility in the context of problems of equality of chances // ONS. 2011, no. 1.

The term social mobility was introduced by P.A. Sorokin in his work in 1927. Social mobility implies any transition of an individual or group from one social position to another. The main characteristics of social mobility are: direction, variety and orientation. Depending on the different combination of these characteristics, the following types and types of mobility are distinguished. The main types of social mobility are: 1) intergenerational(intergenerational, intergenerational) is a change in the position in the social space of an individual compared to the status of the parents; 2) intragenerational(intragenerational) is a comparison of positions occupied by the same individual at different points in his working life. The main types of mobility are:- vertical(in the 70s, “interclass transitions”) - movement from one stratum to another. Can be ascending or descending. As a rule, upward mobility associated with an increase in social status and income is voluntary, and downward mobility is forced; ascension - individual movement to positions of higher prestige, income and power, or the ascension of an entire group. descent is the opposite. - horizontal– the transition of an individual from one social group to another located at the same level social space. As a type, geographic mobility is distinguished - moving from one place to another while maintaining the same status. If such a movement is accompanied by a change in status, then we speak of migration. Types of social mobility can be distinguished according to other criteria: 1) by range: short-range mobility (between adjacent hierarchical levels) and long-range (between distant levels); 2) by quantitative indicator: individual and group; 3) according to the degree of organization: a). spontaneous(for example, moving residents of neighboring countries to large Russian cities for the purpose of earning money); b). organized, which is controlled by the state. Can be carried out with the consent of people (for example, the transfer of youth to Komsomol construction sites in Soviet times) and without their consent (deportation of peoples); V). structural Its reason is changes in the structure of the national economy that occur against the will and consciousness of people (the emergence of new industries and new professions, statuses).

Circulation channels: the function of social circulation is performed in different ways social institutions (organized association of people performing certain social activities significant functions), the most important of which are: army, church, school, political, economic, professional organizations.

Factors of social mobility - conditions affecting mobility. Factors of social mobility: - at the micro level- this is the immediate social environment of the individual, as well as his total life resource. - at the macro level- this is the state of the economy, the level of scientific and technological development, the character political regime, the prevailing stratification system, the nature of natural conditions, etc. Let's highlight factors, determining social mobility in society: the historical type of structure, the state of the economy, the degree of its development, the social situation in the country, ideology, traditions, religion, education, upbringing, family, place of residence, individual characteristics of a person ( talent, ability).

Sorokin: Social mobility - any transition of an individual/social object (value) from one social position to another. 1. Horizontal - transition of an individual/social object from one social group to another, located on that the same level (▲change of citizenship; from one factory to another - while maintaining your professional status)

2. Vertical - those relationships that arise when moving from one social layer to another. a) ascending (social rise) - individual (penetration of an individual from a lower layer to a higher one) - group (creation of an individual -mi new group and the penetration of the entire group into a higher layer with already existing groups) b) downward (social descent) - individual (fall of an individual to a lower social position without disturbing the group) - group (degradation of a social group in general, lowering her rank compared to other groups / destroying her social unity)! Communities (according to the degree of movement): Mobile – Fixed. [+] mobs: contributing to the development of societies (improving the quality of work), personal development is underway, the realization of abilities is underway, reducing confrontation between people (directing energy to replace one’s position).[-] leads to alienation, loss of belonging to a specific group (development of individualism), causes stress, sometimes: destabilization in society.

Social mobility is influenced by the following factors:

1) Level of economic development.

Thus, during periods of economic depression, the number of high-status positions decreases, and low-status positions expand, so downward mobility dominates; on the contrary, during periods of active economic development, many new high-status positions appear and the demand for workers to fill them increases, which provokes upward mobility.

2) Historical type of stratification.

If caste and class societies, then there are societies closed type Where most statuses are ascribed and limit social mobility, imposing serious restrictions on any change in status, then in open societies, where individual merit and achieved status are valued, the level of social mobility is high.

3) Demographic factors. These include: gender, age, birth rate, mortality rate, marriage rate, divorce rate.

In general, young people and men are more mobile than older people and women. Young people are more likely to have professional mobility, adults – economic mobility, and older people – political mobility. Where the birth rate is high, the population is younger and therefore more mobile, and vice versa. Moreover, the birth rate is not equally distributed across classes. The lower classes tend to have more children, and the upper classes fewer. There is a pattern: the higher a person climbs the social ladder, the fewer children he has. Even if every son of a representative of the prestigious strata follows in the footsteps of his father, voids will still form at the upper steps of the social pyramid, which are filled by people from the lower classes. Professionals (doctors, lawyers, etc.) and qualified employees also do not have enough children,

who could fill their jobs in the next generation. It is not difficult to imagine the direction in which social mobility should take place in modern society.

4) Place of residence.

Scientists have actually identified a direct relationship between the size of a settlement and the scale of professional achievements. However, it also turned out that rural youth who move to the city achieve a higher position in comparison with their fathers than native city dwellers do in comparison with theirs.

5) Migration processes.

Immigrants who come to a country from other countries occupy lower positions in the social structure, displacing or hastening the upward mobility of native residents. The same effect is created by migration to cities from rural areas.

6) Social status of the family.

Data from sociologists in different countries indicate that people from the lower middle class, that is, “white collar” workers, and the upper layer of the working class, that is, “blue collar” workers, most rarely inherited their fathers’ professions and were highly mobile. In contrast, upper-class and professional people were more likely to inherit their parents' occupations.

7) Level of education.

The higher the level of education, the greater the chances of moving up the social ladder. A fact has been discovered in the United States: a well-educated son of a working man has as much chance of advancement as a poorly educated son of the middle class, although the latter may be helped by his parents.

8) Nationality.

Representatives of the dominant nation, as a rule, move up the social ladder more easily and more often occupy high positions in society than representatives of smaller nations.

9) Physical and mental abilities.

10) Personal qualities(high level of motivation, initiative, ambition, communication skills, etc.).

Conclusion.

So, social mobility is the totality of social movements of people. This topic has interested humanity for a long time. The unexpected rise of a person or his sudden fall is a favorite plot of folk tales: a cunning beggar suddenly becomes a rich man, a poor prince becomes a king, and the well-known Cinderella, by marrying a prince, thereby changes her status and prestige.

But human history is made up not so much of individual destinies as of the movements of large social groups. Thus, the landed aristocracy is replaced by the financial bourgeoisie, low-skilled professions are being squeezed out of modern production by the so-called “white collar” workers. Wars and revolutions reshape the social structure of society, raising some to the top of the pyramid and lowering others. Mobile individuals begin socialization in one class and end in another. The migration picture of modern society is changing. At the beginning of 1996, there were more than 125 million migrants in the world, who, in essence, formed a kind of “nation of migrants.” Labor turnover continues to influence the movement of social groups. Foreign workers fill jobs that locals are reluctant to fill.

Modern international migration has also undergone qualitative changes due to scientific and technological revolution. Intellectual migration is the exchange of scientists and specialists from different countries for the duration of conferences and internships, i.e. looks like short-term migration. In contrast, “brain drain” is already a type of long-term migration that has negative consequences for the country.

Interethnic conflicts contribute to an increase in the number of refugees from “hot spots”. These are the main types, types and forms (there are no significant differences between these terms) of social mobility.

List of used literature:

1. Dobrenkov V.I., Kravchenko A.I. Sociology: Textbook. - M.: INFRA-M, 2001. - 624 p.;

2. Toshchenko Zh.T. Sociology: General course. - 2nd ed., add. and processed - M.: Wright-M. 2001.

3. Zborovsky G.E., Orlov G.P. Sociology. Textbook for humanitarian universities. -M.: Interprax, 1995.

4.Fundamentals of sociology. Lecture course. Responsible editor Dr. Phil. Sciences A.G. Efendiev. – M.: Society “Knowledge” of Russia, 1993.

5. Komarov M.S. Introduction to sociology: Textbook for higher institutions. – M.:

Science, 1994.

6. Kravchenko A.I. Sociology. Textbook. M.: TK Welby, Prospekt Publishing House 2005.