Research Articles Base: Theory Of Value

Adam Smith and Theory of Value

Introduction             Adam Smith is considered as one of the most important economist that has ever lived. His works have had a vital impact on the economy as well as the world. He is one of the founding fathers of different economic ideas and laws that rule the market today. Furthermore, he is one of the most important figures who contributed in the development of the economic theory. He had helped to established different theories and ideas that are useful today, for many businesses, organizations as well as individuals that are concerns in the field of economy. He had also help to create important guidelines for different nations in order to manage different aspects of economy that can improve the financial performance of their country.             The theory of value is considered as the heart of the economic science, hence, it is considered as the nodal points of the history of the entire political economy that reflected in the fortune of the theory of value (Arestis & Sawyer 2000, p. 436). This is due to the fact that it helps many business, organizations and individuals to analyze as well as decide regarding the process of setting the accurate and acceptable price or amount of a particular product or service. Theory of value has a great impact and importance to the different works and theories of Smith regarding his different economic ideas. This paper will focus on the different impact as well as the importance of the theory of value to the works of Smith as well as his consistency in using the said theory.             This paper will show the different ideas of Smith regarding economics as well as its connection with the different theories of value. Theory of Value             Theory of value is the general and common term that is used by economist that includes all the theories in economics that attempt to explain the process of the exchange of value or price of the goods and services (Busky 2002). There are different questions that are included in these economic theories such as: why a specific good and service is priced as it is; how the value of a specific good and service comes about, as well as how to compute the right price of specific good and service (Busky 2002).             There are two categories of theory of values, the intrinsic and the subjective. The intrinsic theories suggest that the price of the products and services are not a function of any subjective judgments. The labor theory of value is one of the greatest examples, which hold that the different prices in the market economy are the function of how much the labor was put into the production of a certain product. On the other hand, subjective theories firmly believe that for a particular object to have its economic value, it must first, satisfy the needs and demands of human, furthermore, it must also be limited in supply. The said category of theories focuses on the judgments of the neoclassic economists (Princeton University n.d.). Adam Smith’s Works and Theory of Value             Theory of value is one of the most important as well as most studies aspect of economics. This is due to the fact that it has a great impact on the past as well as current run and situation of the entire global economy. Furthermore, theory of values plays an important role in many of the works as well as ideas of Smith.             Smith rejected utility as the determinant of value as well as accepted the labor theory (Clark, Douglas & Hollander 1928, p. 77). He had distinguished between the value in use as well as the value in exchange, furthermore he also believe that the value in exchange could not be dependent on the value that is in use. In order to support his ideas, he cited the Paradox of Diamonds and Water, and showed that there was small predictable relationship between the said values (William King 2008).             Division labor has been one of the most important as well as most used economic theories; there have been many countries that are already implementing it. This eventually made exchanges everywhere, and the ration at which the products or services one produces exchange for the products and services that one desires had become an important element for an individual as well as in national prosperity. Furthermore, it is not enough to produce a large physical quantity of goods. If one person is to be comfortable, it is also important to know that the ratios of these good in ratio, in terms of other products should also be sufficiently high in order to yield a comfortable real income in goods. The said ideas show the theory of production, and it is one of the important theories of values. At first, Smith had considered the possibility of utility, but later on decided to dismiss it due to the paradox that had been pointed out by Locke in his Hutcheson Law, and Harris before him, that shows the relationship between the relative value of the water and diamonds. Upon Smith’s abandonment of the labor-embodied theory of value, he focuses on the cost-of-production theory in order to explain the values that are under the capitalist exchange relations. In addition, Smith also believes that wages, profit as well as the rent are the three original sources of all the revenue and exchangeable value (Henry n.d, p. 1). According to him, nothing more will be useful than water, but it will purchase scarce anything; scarce anything can be had in exchange for it. On the other hand, a diamond, has scarce any value in use; but it has a very great quantity of other goods may frequently be had in exchange for it. That is the reason why he concluded that the value in use or the utility is an independent nature with the value in exchange. Furthermore, Smith also believes that the things that have the greatest value in use have frequently little or no value in the exchange. On the other hand, those things that have the greatest value in the exchange have frequently little or no value in use. The primary reason why Smith had abandoned utility as one of the important determinant of value is because he compared the total utilities that had been caused by the changing types of objects more than their marginal utilities (Clark, Douglas & Hollander 1928, p. 78). The said theory of Smith had been able to give new ideas in the economics. This lead to the idea regarding the value of the commodity, which is considered as the sum of all the normal amounts of payable to all of the factors that are used in production. After some time, the price of commodity had been determined by the costs of production alone such as the wage, profit and the rent. However, due to some changes such as the capital in the productive process and privatization of the land, the labor theory of value of Smith had become the cost-of-productivity theory (cited in Henry n.d., p. 2). Labor and Theory of Value             Smith believes that labor has as great impact to the process of pricing of any product and service in the market. According to him every man, regardless of his or her status in life, can afford to enjoy different conveniences as well as amusements in life. However, due to the application of division of labor, there have been a small part of it labor can supply him or her. Therefore, the value of the commodities is equal to the labor that enables a person to purchase or avail. That is the reason why Smith firmly believes that labor is one of the real measures of the exchangeable value of all types of commodities (cited in Henry n.d., p. 4).             On the other hand, Smith also believes that although the labor is considered as one of the direct measurement for the value of all commodities, it is not that by which their value is commonly estimated. Furthermore, Smith explains that the value is being measured by the quantities of the labor that had been spent in the output. Furthermore, the price will be deviate from the value, but to the point where in it will be troublesome for the business (cited in Henry n.d., p. 5).             Theory of value had been able to help Smith to explain the process where in the market translate the real, labor-embodied prices into money process. He believes that it serve as a conservative surrogates for the fundamental values. He also added that while the labor can be considered as the actual measure of the value, in a monetary economy, money itself, is the customary way of representing the value, but the nominal prices are adjusted using the basis on the labor that have been done in the production of the money as well as other commodities. On the other hand, when the barter stops, and when the money has become the general tool of commerce, each and every commodity will be exchanged more for money than other commodity. This situation shows that the exchangeable value of each commodity is estimated by the quantity of money than labor or other commodity in exchange for it (cited in Henry n.d., p. 6).             In the said theory of the relationship between value and labor, it is clear that Smith firmly believe that labor is the only universal and only accurate factors that can help to measure the value of a commodity. Furthermore, Smith also believes that it can also be the only standard that can be compared with the values of the different commodities of any time at every place (cited in Henry n.d., p. 6). Distribution and Theory of Value             Smith also focuses on the different aspects that can affect the value of commodities aside from labor.  He strongly believe that any price represents value that can be seen as amounting to the portions of a particular price that can constitute the income that is shared by the workers, capitalist as well as the landlords. Furthermore, the price or the value is not the results of the process of adding up the different costs of production, but it is the total of the shares must equal the price. Therefore, the sum of the different prices that represents the sum of the commodities that are being exchanged must be equal to the sum of different income shares that are being distributed or the price of the product must be equal to the total income (cited in Henry n.d., p. 7).             Smith had been able to show the relationship of the distribution process as well as the value of commodities. This had been able to show the different aspects, aside from labor that affected the process of setting the price of particular product or service. Laissez-faire Liberalism             In the An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations by Smith, he had been able to show a theoretical system of a capitalist economy as part of its economic structure. He had also, been able to show the principle of the individualistic behavior that is guided by self-interest, as well as the harmony in an economic system due to natural liberty that is being guided by an invisible hand. He had been able to show the laissez –faire as the achievement from best policy by social order (Itoh 1988, p. 13). This shows the process of division of labor, where in each and every individual shares their own motivation that pushes them to work.             In the said concept, theories had been one of the important aspects in order for him to show the importance of the laissez-faire liberalism. He had been able to question regarding how a commercial society autonomously maintain itself, by the process of production as well as distribution basis of each value as well as the surplus value, which are universalized by the labor theory of value, as well as how the major classes are being converted into the capitalists, the landlords as well as the laborers (Itoh 1988, p. 13). Conclusion             Theory of value had been able to help Smith to focus on the different aspects that are related with his theories such as theories of production and labor. Furthermore, it also important due to the fact that it serves as his references or evidence with connection to his works.             In general, Smith ideas focuses on the aspect that the amount of the labor that are required in order to produce certain good and service can be determine by the rate where in it can be exchanged for another good, but there are some exceptions that have been mentioned. Furthermore, he also firmly showed that if a supply of a specific product or service cannot be increased by the labor, the its value will be established based on its scarcity, not on the labor that are included and have been done in order to obtain the output or the finished product. This can be showed by the case of old paintings, where in it can no longer be produced due to the fact that the painters and artists that had painted those were already dead, therefore, the price of the said painting can rise to any height without considering the competing supply of the new production process.             Smith also considered monopoly as one of the exempted cases. This is due to the fact that businesses or organizations that are into this kind of market can maintain the limited supply of their product, thus thwarting the possible competitors or competition in new production.              Above all, Smith had been able to show that people can decide regarding production for themselves, at all times, rather than getting products and services in exchange for others. If people will give up more labor in order to get good by exchange, then it could help to produce for them. Furthermore, he also established the idea that if a certain individual cannot produce something for himself of herself, a group can. Thus this can lead to a possible competition from the new production that will help to maintain the different prices in the value of the labor.             Above all, regarding the issue of labor, he also added that there is a justice that exists, in the exchange of the values of labor. Labor is considered as one of the cost in the process of production, due to the fact that it requires effort as well as time in order to do so. On the other hand, the labor that is associated in a product and service is considered as a measure of the sacrifices that are involved in the process of production. That is why the exchange of the values in labor is considered as the exchange of equal and fair sacrifices.             Smith had been able to show consistency in establishing different ideas and theories that connects and relates the value of commodities and the labor. Furthermore, he also shows different factors and aspects that are connected with the relationship between the value and labor.                   References   Adam Smith and the Labor Theory of Value 2008, William King, viewed 30 July 2008, < http://william-king.www.drexel.edu/top/prin/txt/marx/marx1.html>   Arestis, P & Sawyer, M 2000, A Biographical Dictionary of Dissenting Economists, Edward Elgar Publishing   Busky, D 2002, Communism in History and Theory: From Utopian Socialism to the Fall of the Soviet Union, Praeger   Clark, J M, Douglas, P & Hollander, J 1928, Adam Smith, 1776 – 1986 : Lectures to Commemorate the Sesquicentennial of the Publication of “The Wealth of Nations”, University of Chicago Press, Chicago   Henry, J, Adam Smith and the Theory of Value: Chapter Six Considered, The Australian National University, viewed 30 July 2008, < http://hetsa.fec.anu.edu.au/review/ejournal/pdf/31-A-1.pdf>   Intrinsic Value, Princeton University, viewed 30 July 2008, < http://www.princeton.edu/~harman/Papers/Intrinsic.pdf>   Itoh, M 1988, The Basic Theory of Capitalism: The Forms and Substance of the Capitalist Economy, Roman & Littlefield Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com

Adam Smith and Theory of Value

Introduction Adam Smith is considered as one of the most important economist that has ever lived. His works have had a vit...

Theories Of Peter Drucker

Peter Drucker – The Father of New Management     Management guru Peter F. Drucker was the most popular consultant after the World War II (1991;  2003). He wrote several management related literatures that served a great function to every reader especially the people involved in management. Because of Drucker’s apparently unsystematic style, one historian has concluded that his “real contribution” to management had been not so much in “the cash value of his ideas as in the rigorous activity of mind” by which they were formulated and that managers could learn more from “watching him think than from studying the content of his thought (1980).” He developed management by objectives to integrate European political ideas with American management and to direct the new professional employees that he called knowledge workers. Drucker did develop a political theory of management. He popularized decentralization, privatization, empowerment, knowledge worker, MBO, and flat organizations ( 1996). Drucker is a corporatist thinker. The key to his corporatism is the technique he labeled as “management by objectives and self-control,” or popularly called MBO in the business language. He designed it to overcome problems that Taylor and Mayo had been unable to solve. In creating such principle, he aims to help managers stop treating people as factors of production and transcend an irrational separation of planning and performing for supervising professional employees (1991). With such belief, he compared the managerial function to that of the orchestra. The goal is the piece and the manager is the conductor who selects it. Like management, each musician played one instrument and one part. But the conductor harmonized the efforts of all the performers in the orchestra so that the goal was achieved. “The conductor himself,” Drucker explained, “does not play an instrument. He need not even know how to play an instrument. His job is to know the capacity of each instrument and to evoke optimal performance from each.” “Instead of ‘doing,’ he leads (1954; 1955; 1968).” Initially, Drucker labeled these new workers the “new industrial middle class,” but eventually he called them “knowledge workers” (1977). Knowledge workers, as he saw it, were the new skilled workers, and their tasks and self-perceptions were different from those of manual workers. They used knowledge rather than “physical force or manual skill” and produced ideas rather than things. Each saw himself or herself as a professional, if not as an intellectual. Collectively, they saw themselves as a part of management without being ‘managers,’ and as ‘workers’ without considering themselves ‘proletarians’. They did not command people, but their command of information influenced management (1955; 1968; 1977). With his belief in employees as knowledge workers and the given importance of empowerment, Drucker emphasized the interconnection of organizational behavior in the organization’s performance. Organizational behavior by itself is a social science discipline.  (2002) expounds on this as much like cultural anthropology, economics, political science, psychology, and sociology. This means that it uses the scientific method to establish truth and to validate its theories. It is a discipline that historically has had its intellectual home in business schools. And it is a new discipline relative to the other social sciences, having its origins in the middle of the twentieth century. The key points are that it is a science and that it has a history which, though short, has been quite turbulent (2002). The concern of organizational behavior is, first, with the behavior and nature of the people within organizations and, second, with the behavior and nature of organizations within their environments. Being part of an organization requires an individual to embrace initial changes within him/her. In the business context or regardless of the nature of how it is practiced, Organizational behavior has become a common label of pertaining to the varied concepts over people management and organization behavior. However, even with many different connotations of human resource and management, this is not sufficed to say that the approach on the content has changed. Instead the common theoretical factors on group communication, Individual and group teamwork, perception within an organization, learning styles per individual (1996), cultural differences still remains and needs to be efficiently addressed for an organization to eventually succeed. As based on Drucker’s principle, organizational behavior is a vital and constantly growing field of study which is dedicated to the new generations of constantly growing body of knowledge which advances the human conditions in any organization ( 1988). Understanding its studies on social and organizational aspects from the with respect on human personalities, organizational behavior spans its relevance to society, based on the need to understand  the developmental  processes on persons, groups, organizations, systems and even global communities at large, the historical roots of organizational behavior goes back to more than a century and even includes psychiatry in its study, individual and social psychology, sociology, social philosophy, political science and anthropology (1991).  Today, Drucker’s principles are still applicable and constantly flourishing. It plays an imperative function in every growing business. Its proven and tested effects and advantages are the reason why most management practitioners utilized it. Further, organizational behavior is still more studied upon and stands as a fertile ground for the many disciplines of study, theoretical and practical endeavors which defines not just itself but proving to be a generative discipline reaching across boundaries. Once totally understood, organizational behavior will eventually demonstrate its potentials, all available for the success of the organizations that practices it.   Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com

Theories Of Peter Drucker

Peter Drucker – The Father of New Management Management guru Peter F. Drucker was the most popular consultant after the World War I...

Introduction to Theories

Introduction to Theories   Introduction to Politics Theory Does Hobbes’ theory of the social contract provide a convincing reason for always obeying the law?               It has been reported that the theory of the social contract is based on the assumption that all men live in a harsh and uncivilized state of nature, and in order to move away from these conditions, men enter into a contract with each other, allowing them to live in peace and unity. This theory can be seen as a justification for the formation of the state, where all members within a society are assumed to agree to the terms of the social contract by their choice to stay within the society without violating the contract, where a violation would signify a problematic attempt to man as either “good” or evil” (2006). In relation to this, many philosophers were able to conceptualize theories that will explain realities in the society. One of the famous theorists and philosophers was Thomas Hobbes.             Thomas Hobbes is the founding father of modern political philosophy, and he has set the terms of debate about the fundamentals of political life right into the present time. His main concern is the problem of social and political order, such as how human beings can live together in peace and avoids the danger and fear of civil conflict ( (1588-1679) 2006). Hobbes has a particular theory of human nature, which gives rise to a particular view of morality and politics, as developed in his philosophical masterpiece, Leviathan, which was published in 1651, and sought to provide a theory of human nature that would parallel the discoveries being made in the sciences of the inanimate universe (2006).             It has been reported that according to Hobbes’ and canonical theory, “without society, we would live in a state of nature, where we each have unlimited natural freedoms, and the downside of this general autonomy is that it includes the ‘right to all things’ and thus the freedom to harm all who threaten one’s own self-preservation; there are no positive rights, only laws of nature and an endless ‘war of all against all’” (2006). In addition, to avoid this, we jointly agree to an implicit social contract by which we each gain civil rights in return for accepting the obligation to honor the rights of others, giving up some freedoms to do so (2006). In relation to this, Thomas Hobbes contended that people in a state of nature surrendered their individual rights to create sovereignty, retained by the state, in return for their protection and a more functional society, so social contract evolves out of pragmatic self-interest (2006), which can be fully understood with the discussion of the whole theory.   Political Philosophy of Hobbes             The psychological theory of Hobbes is influenced by mechanism, where everything in the universe is produced by none other than matter in motion, which also extends to human behavior. Human macro-behavior can be described as the effects of certain kinds of human micro-behavior, which are in turn, caused by the interaction of small particles inside our bodies. Hobbes’s views of mechanistic quality of human psychology implies the subjective nature of normative claims, so moral terms do not describe objective state of affairs, but are rather reflections of individual tastes and preferences (2006). Moreover, he argues that humans are necessarily and exclusively self-interested, wherein all men pursue only what they perceive to be in their own best interest, and respond by being drawn to their desires and repelled by what they despise. Human beings are also reasonable, for they have the rational capacity to follow their desires as efficiently as possible. The rationality of human beings is instrumental, being used as a vehicle to arrive at certain ends, and to formulate the best means for the desired end (2006).             From this, Hobbes was able to formulate a theory that would explain the behavior of human beings under the influence of political power and rule. According to Thomas Hobbes, the justification for political obligation is given that men are naturally self-interested, yet are rational, and will choose to submit to the authority of a Sovereign in order to be able to live in a civil society that is conducive to their own interests (2006). In man’s State of Nature, he or she is naturally and exclusively self-interested, is equal to one another, with limited resources, and has no power able to force men to cooperate. However, due to man’s rationality, each can see their way out of such a horrid state by recognizing the laws of nature, which shows them the means to escape the State of Nature and create a civil society (2006). Using man’s rationality and ability to reason, he or she can create a united and harmonious society, in accordance to the rules made by the citizens of the society themselves. The most important law of nature commands that each man should be willing to pursue peace, likewise, in constancy to retaining the right to continue in pursuing war. With this, man will be able to construct a Social Contract that will afford the society a life other than that available to them in the State of Nature (2006).  (1994) states that Hobbes’s social contract forms a ‘people’ capable of deciding by a majority vote on a common representative authorized to preserve internal peace and external defense. Its primary aim is not to control, but rather to make a body politic that agrees with the logic of politics (1994). Moreover, this contract is constituted by two distinguishable contracts, where one, they must agree to establish a society by collectively and reciprocally renouncing the rights they had against one another in the State of Nature, and the other, they must instill an individual or a group of individuals with the authority and power to enforce the initial contract. In essence, Hobbes argues that to ensure man’s escape from the State of Nature, they must both agree to live together under common laws, and create an enforcement mechanism for the social contract and the laws that constitute it (2006).             Furthermore, since the Sovereign is invested with the authority and power to punish whoever violates the contract, man has the good, self-interest, and the reason to adjust themselves to the pretense of morality and justice. This enables society because with a contract, there is an artificially and conventionally superior and more powerful person who can force men to cooperate, in contrast to the State of Nature, wherein there is no power able to subdue the rest.  argues that because men’s passions can be expected to overwhelm their reason, the Sovereign must have absolute authority in order for the contract to be successful, making living under the authority of Sovereignty more manageable than living under the State of Nature (2006). Obeying the Law             The concept and theory of Thomas Hobbes on social contract, State of Nature, Sovereign, and politics become useful in response to the question presented. This theory now enables us to decide whether to always obey the laws or not, authorized by the Sovereign.             Primarily, it is essential that man follow or obey the laws made by the Sovereign for many reasons. The primary reason is in relation to the theory of Thomas Hobbes on man’s State of Nature. Hobbes argues that by nature, man is selfish, ignorant and impulsive. These characteristics or traits of man allow him or her to think only of his or her interests and never on the good of everyone else. The absence of a Sovereign and the laws governing man would permit every man to pursue his or her own wants and desires, without thinking of others, and each would be making decision in accordance to their own benefit only. If this happens then, there would be chaos in the entire universe. Every human being would be in conflict with one another, leading to wars and bloodshed everywhere. If man will not obey the laws governing him, then possibly, chaos will be the result of it. In essence, obeying the laws and rules made and passed by the Sovereign is a way of suppressing, but not entirely, the State of Nature of human beings.             Another important point to take note of is the fact that obeying the rules and laws made by the Sovereign would maintain social order. Social order refers to a set of linked social structures, social institutions, and social practices, which conserve, maintain and enforce “normal” ways of relating and behaving; a relatively stable system of institutions, pattern of interactions and customs, capable of continually reproducing at least those conditions essential for its own existence; and all those facets of society, which remain relatively constant over time. The conditions in social order include property, exchange, power relations, cultural forms, communication relations, and ideological systems of values (2006). It is a fact that changes is inevitable in a dynamic society, and nowadays, changes happen very quickly. However, it should be remembered that laws governing man must be obeyed and followed for the benefit of man as well. Laws must be followed to maintain social order, in the Sovereign’s intention and desire to prevent crimes and other violations to happen in the society, for these violations and crimes committed in the society are committed against another person or groups of individuals. To prevent this from happening, each individual must be responsible enough to comply with the rules given to him.             However, there are certain instances wherein one must use his or her ability and capacity to think rationally in assessing the need for disobeying a law or rule authorized by the Sovereign. Most of the time, authorized or proper disobeying the law is caused by the fact that one or a few members of the Sovereign or the Council of Leaders have plans of using and abusing their powers to pursue their selfish interests. One of the rules governing man to maintain social order is following the orders of a superior. Yet, it would not be proper and significant if one would permit the use and abuse of one’s power or decisions for the benefit of one or few individuals only and not the whole society. This would not only violate the rights of men in society, but also allow social chaos and discord to happen. Another relevant situation is disobeying the law in relation to abuse of nature, which must not be tolerated. In some nations or societies, many individuals in power abuse their position to pursue their selfish interests, including the abuse of nature, such as engaging in illegal logging. Most of these individuals use their position and influence to get what they want. However, one must use his or her rationality so as not to allow such abuse to take place. One must be able to realize the negative consequences of this, and be able to justify his or her reason for disobeying the law and the order of his superior.             Another point in justifying disobedience to the law and to the orders of superiors is the possibility of creating a decision that would lead to chaos or war against another society or nation, and the violation of a rule or rules of the Sovereign. The Sovereign must promote social order and unity, and if ever it will be promoting otherwise, then other individuals in position and power must be able to justify themselves in disobeying orders. Lastly, disobeying the law or rules become second in priority when it comes to life-and-death situations. With these given situations, one must use his or her capacity to think rationally in making essential and wise decisions. One must use his or her rationality to prioritize situations and decisions, to arrive at sound judgments and consequences in relation to any given situations. In addition, man must learn to control his innate State of Nature, and be able to think progressively and make considerations on the needs of other human beings present in the society.         Introduction to European Politics Does Germany treat immigrants as citizens?               Immigration in the modern context refers to the movement of people from one nation-state to another, where they are not citizens, and implies a long-term permanent residence by the immigrants, which excludes tourists and short-term visitors. The modern idea of immigration is related to the development of nation-states with clear citizenship criteria, passports, permanent border controls, and nationality law, where citizenship of a nation-state grants an inalienable right of residence in a specific state, but residency is subject to conditions set by the immigration law. However, the nation-states made immigration a political issue, wherein certain issues are involved, such as social tensions, xenophobia, and conflicts about national identity (2006).             People settle from one country to another for a variety of reasons, such as the incidence that some are forced to move, due to conflict, to escape persecution, and the desire to voluntarily emigrate (2006). On the other hand, immigration also represents an act of courage, wherein moving to a different country with different culture and norms can be intimidating, suffering loneliness is not easy to overcome, plus the additional pressure to earn enough living to be sent to one’s own family back home. In addition, there are also incidences of economic migrants, an individual searching for work or better opportunities in other countries. Evidently, the Inter Press Service or IPS reports that the European Union has recently acknowledged the concern about immigration that has not been receiving much attention from the media, which states that a large number of people are attempting to leave the devastation of their own country caused by the current form of globalization, and other political and economic policies. This incidence creates a large number of losers, thus, increasing inequality (2006).             Immigration also presents various effects to the immigrants and to their host countries. Most often than not, immigrants obtain jobs that people in the host country will not or cannot do; they even work longer hours and for lower salaries, being controversial and exploitative; immigrants contribute to the diversity of the society, which can help with tolerance and understanding; and they offer an increased talent pool, for being well educated in their original country. However, aside from the positive effects, immigration also presents disadvantages. Immigrants can be exploited for their cheap labor, developing countries may suffer from “brain drain”; immigration can attract criminal elements from trafficking drugs and people; can become a social or political issue, where racism can be used to exploit feelings or as an excuse; discrimination, and other conflicts (2006). Due to these, this essay will be evaluating and assessing the concept of immigration in Germany, and if the German society treat immigrants as citizens.             Immigration and Immigrants in Germany             It has been reported that since the 1990s, analysts have pointed to Germany’s ongoing need for immigrants to bolster economic development and maintain a dynamic workforce, given the rapid aging of the country’s population (2004). However, with the fast-changing times, Germany was forced to come up with a law or act in response to the increasing number and large volume of immigrants to their country. It has been reported that since 2005, Germany is making a greater attempt to encourage immigration of highly skilled workers to their country, granting them easier permanent residency, and professions needed include natural scientists, such as biologists, chemists, and physicists, engineers, professors, and scientific personnel in high technology areas (2006). In relation to this, a new German Immigration Act was made, which came into force on January 1, 2005, in which it states that highly qualified persons will be granted permanent residence and permission to work in Germany from the beginning, rather than five-year work permits, given that they have a concrete job offer and a permission from the German Employment Agency. This new law also aims to reduce bureaucracy, such that aspiring immigrants will report to the German embassy in their home country to receive work and residency permission (  2006). In addition, family members of the immigrants who enter Germany can also obtain the right to work in the country as well. This also includes education privileges, wherein foreign students will have a year to look for a job if they wish to stay in Germany. Moreover, self-employed immigrants will also feel more welcomed under the new law, if they invest one million euro, which will create ten new German jobs. It must also be taken note of that Germany is a member of the Schengen Agreement, enabling a holder of a Schengen Visa to travel from one Schengen country to another freely. The new German Immigration Act has replaced the former German Green Card Initiative, which made it easier for foreign IT specialists to work in Germany, however, unsuccessful for it did not succeed in bringing about the additional IT workers as was expected and is limited only to IT specialists (2006).             From the laws mentioned, it is evident that Germany is badly in need of many highly skilled workers to fulfill several functions in their country. However, it is essential to take note of and evaluate the treatments of the German society to their immigrants.  (2005) states that in order to investigate the impact of immigration on employment opportunities in Germany, relevant labor market segments must be first determined. The author reports that the insight that schooling and experience play a role in defining distinct skill groups may provide a good basis for an empirical analysis of how immigrants affect the employment opportunities of natives (2005), for highly skilled immigrants have attained higher education than non-skilled workers. With more highly skilled immigrants entering Germany, then changes also happen to the country’s labor market opportunities over time. This affects the wages of the workers, which is subject to Social Security contributions in Germany ( 2005). In relation to the new Immigration Law, it has been reported that official promises of promoting the integration of immigrants in Germany have proved illusory, such that the law gives greater powers to the authorities and enables them to act far more repressively against immigrants and refugees (2005). A 35-year old Turkish immigrant was deported from Germany after living and working there for 35 years, because he was unemployed and had claimed welfare benefits.  worked as an unskilled laborer for numerous companies in Germany, but when he applied for his unemployment benefits in January 2005, he received notification from the authorities that his residency permit would not be extended, for no longer providing the financial means for his stay, and even threatened with deportation should he disregard the notice. The reason behind this is the law that states that if an immigrant applied for social security benefits for himself, his relatives residing within Germany, or for persons in his household whom he was responsible to maintain, the authorities will be given discretion to report the immigrant, however, rarely used, for it mainly served to intimidate and put foreigners under pressure to accept poorly paid jobs (2005). In essence, Germany has the right to deport someone not anymore capable of providing the country financial contributions, and this reason gives the authorities the right to violate the human rights of immigrants. Consequently, Germany’s restrictive immigration laws, which make it possible to simply deport immigrants who become unemployed and claim welfare, are the most potent weapon of the ruling elite for intimidating and suppressing foreign workers, such that the systemic destruction of all rights concerning immigrants and refugees opens the way for attacks on the social and democratic rights of all working people (2005).             In line with this economic discrimination is the fact that social and racial discrimination is very evident in the country. It has been reported that due to poverty, one out of four immigrants in Germany is considered as poor, since their household income was less that 60% of the average income (2005). Due to poverty of the immigrants, children and young people from immigrant families are clearly disadvantaged in terms of education, as evidenced that 20% of those from immigrant families left high school without graduating, and the chances of gaining an apprenticeship have considerably worsened for young immigrants (2005). This inequality in accessing education and training is directly associated to the risk of poverty, wherein 60% of immigrants drawing welfare benefits have no formal job training. Moreover, the increasing flexibility and deregulation of the job market strikes immigrants and refugees hard, for many only have temporary employments, which fluctuate between work and unemployment and living at or near the subsistence level (2005).             Moreover, it has been reported that an essential reason that the German party system has not responded to immigration is that a large number of immigrants do not have or have not gained German citizenship, and as a result, are not entitled to vote ( 2000). In addition, the number of native Germans entitled to vote is decreasing because of a drop in the birth rate ( 2000). This must not be so, because one of the rights and privileges of naturalized immigrants in any country includes the right to vote and participate in elections. This is one form of discrimination, as the government of Germany does not give its immigrants, and in this case “citizens” the right to be heard in terms of voting. Furthermore, in Germany, immigrants and refugees are being subjected to brutality at the hands of right-wing extremists who instigate hate crimes and assaults, and such attacks have increased against in recent months, leading people to accuse and criticize the inability of the German government to stop the violence and protect foreigners (2001). Neo-Nazi violence against immigrants and refugees is not something new in Germany, however, the alarming fact is the fact that neo-Nazi members commit their savage and cruel crimes against the helpless foreigners, but still state authorities remain silent and passive towards these crimes (2001). These incidences just prove to show that immigrants in Germany are not treated well, and not even treated as citizens. The mere fact that they are not entitled to vote and participate in elections is a good basis on the immigrants’ desolate situation in Germany. It is true that discrimination is already integrated in the system and culture of any country, most especially the Germans. It is also a given fact that in relation to discrimination is the incidence of violence and crimes towards the weaker individuals in the society, and in this case, are the immigrants and refugees. However, in the case of the immigrants in Germany, they suffer these injustices in hope for granting them the citizenship, the rights and the privileges of equal and rightful individuals of the German society. It is true that immigration is an essential part of the economic and social phenomena, for even the most developed countries in Europe and the Americas need the contributions, skills and talents of immigrants from various countries. However, these nations, including Germany, must be able to provide the immigrants their promises of “greener pastures” and better living, for these are their reasons for leaving their homeland. For justice and righteousness sake, Germany must be able to provide the rights and privileges to immigrants in accordance to their Immigration Law. Introduction to International Relations What does Realism exclude from the study of International Relations? Does this render it “unrealistic”?               It has been reported that International Relations or IR is a branch of political science, a study of foreign affairs of and relations among states within the international system, including the roles of states, inter-governmental organizations, non-governmental organizations, and multinational corporations, and is both an academic and public policy field, which can either be positive or normative, as it both seeks to analyze as well as formulate foreign policy (2006). Its object of study is variously described as the ‘international system’ and ‘international society’ (1996). An International System is defined as comprising two or more states, which have sufficient contact between them to behave as parts of a whole, and subsequently, states behave ‘strategically’, making their decisions based on what they think other states will do. On the other hand, an International Society is defined as a group of states, which knowingly share common interests and values, and conceive themselves to be bound by a common set of rules in their relations with one another and share in the working of common institutions ( 1996).             In addition, International Relations theories can be roughly divided into one of two groups, namely, the positivist and post-positivist, where positivist theories intends to replicate the methods of the natural sciences by analyzing the impact of material forces, focusing on state interactions, the size of military forces, and the balance of powers. On the other hand, post-positivist theories reject the idea that the social world can be studied in an objective and value-free way, by rejecting the central ideas of neo-liberalism and liberalism, on the grounds that the scientific method cannot be applied to the social world and that ‘science’ in terms of International Relations is not possible (2006).   Concept of Realism             One of the concepts belonging on the positivist side of the theories of International Relations is the theory of Realism or Political Realism. It has been reported that realism is an approach to the study and practice of international politics, emphasizes the role of the nation-state and makes a broad assumption that national interests motivate all nation-states, or, at best, national interests disguised as moral concerns (2006). National interest is the idea that all states seek to preserve their political autonomy and their territorial integrity, and interests may be in securing more resources or land; other states may wish to expand their own political or economic systems into other areas, or some may merely wish to be left alone. National interest must be defined in terms of power, or national power, and in the context of realism, power is relative of the state’s ability to defend itself against the power of another state, or the its ability to coerce another state to change that state’s policies. Power, being relative, is derived from the realist conception of the international system, which is an anarchical environment (2006). In an anarchical environment, states oppose each other and consider it their main objective to survive by protecting their territorial integrity and the physical well-being of their citizens and because of this, security is the absence of physical threats to the territorial and functional integrity of a given state (2006). In an anarchical environment, all states have to rely upon their own resources to secure their interests, enforce whatever agreements they have with other states, and to maintain a desirable domestic and international order ( 2006). Moreover, the political realist fears centralized authority, unless it is derived from the power of his or her own state, for the decentralization of the international system permits greater diversity. A central authority would be more essential in its aim to increase the state’s power ( 2006).             It has been mentioned that positivist theories, such as realism, offer causal explanations and make distinctions between facts and values ( 2006), and these descriptions will be helpful to assess if realism could be rendered as being “unrealistic”.             Being a positivist theory, realism uses the idea that science is seen as the way to get at truth, to understand the world well enough so that we might predict and control it ( 2006). This means that science is seen as exact and unchangeable. However, realists believe likewise, and apply them to the concept of politics and society.             The concept of realism states that there is no authority above states capable of regulating their interactions, states must arrive at relations with other states on their own, rather than it being dictated to them by some higher controlling entity, and that sovereign states are the principal actors in the international system (2006). In addition, in pursuit of national security, states must strive to accumulate resources, and relations between states are determined by their comparative level of power from their military, economic and moral capabilities (2006).             Based on these given assumptions, it can be deduced that the ideas in realism integrates in it a cause-and-effect relationship, and its pure reference on the facts in terms of politics and society. However, although some events and realities can be explained through the concepts of realism, sometimes, it is not applicable to always apply the concept in the reality. It is true that nations make interrelations and trade with one another without the orders or control of a higher group or individual. However, this is not always the case. Most developed and developing countries are a member of international organizations and groups, which somehow help the member nations to make relations and trade with one another. Such international organizations include the United Nations, the World Trade Organization, the European Union, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, the International Monetary Fund, and the World Bank among many others, and these organizations are responsible for establishing treaties and providing them with legal recognition ( 2006). In addition, these large organizations handle cases, such as when conflicts exist between or among nations or countries. With the vastness of Earth’s geography, many countries will not be able to make trade relations with one another, and the tendency for these countries to relate consequently is in the event that one country needs the support of the other. However, in the event that one nation is in conflict with another, it is essential that a governing body, such as the World Trade Organization, European Union and United Nations be responsible for the resolution of the conflict between or among the countries. In this way, conflicts can be resolved properly and peacefully. Moreover, without a governing body, interrelations of nations would not as effective and efficient. More often than not, nations trade with one another in accordance to the treaties and laws governing them under a larger organization, such as the United Nations. The United Nations creates treaties and rules regarding tariffs, taxes, import and export, and many others, which could be helpful for both parties. With these treaties and laws, one nation cannot take advantage of the other, which results to peaceful interrelations with one another. Therefore, in this sense, the fact that realism argues that nations make relations with other states on their own, rather than it being dictated to them by some higher controlling entity could also be revoked. Another argument of the concept of realism is its idea of national interest, wherein it is preserved in the nation’s aim for territorial integrity and in acquiring national land or resources, political and economic systems. Although the intention of the concept of national interest is moral and genuine, at present, it is difficult for nations and nation leaders to state that their acquisition of resources and power is for the benefit of the whole nation, given the decrease of morality in the context of politics. In politics, power poisons the minds of many individuals in authority, which enable the society to experience difficulty in trusting politicians in terms of their expression of national interest. Most politicians who are able to grasp and attain political power tend to use and abuse their power to obtain their selfish interests. They tend to commit violations against the law and the society and even against nature and morality as well. Such violations include graft and corruption, murder, and other crimes. More often than not, corruption is one of the most committed violations against the society, as it undermines democratic institutions, retards economic development, and contributes to government instability by distorting electoral processes, perverting the rule of law, and creating bureaucratic dilemmas whose only reason for existence is the soliciting of bribes (2006). If politicians nowadays will prove to the people of their genuine intentions in their expression of national interest, then it is possible that the concept of realism will still be applicable at present time. However, due to the dynamism of society along with its morality, it could be hard to apply the theory of realism. In relation to national interest is national power, which is possible if a state is able to exist in an anarchical environment, where threats are absent, and if the state is able to defend itself from the power of another state or force its power to another state. However, at present, a concrete example of its unrealism is the fact that terrorism exists among developed countries such as the United States. If many nations would implement the theory of realism in terms of international relations, then these realities would not even exist. If national power were that “powerful”, then it would be able to control and manipulate the possibility that each nation would be living in an anarchical environment, where physical threats are non-existent. However, due to the presence of threats such as terrorism and forms of warfare, this just means that the concept of national power is not able to defeat the power of outside forces. In addition, this also means that the power of the outside forces and other factors are even more powerful than national power. It is true that the concept of national power help binds the unity and the harmony within the society, and it helps the leaders of the society to assess the extent of their control in terms of politics. However, a nation must not only rely on the extent of its national power, for other more powerful political forces and elements bind its power. In essence, the concept of realism is both applicable and unrealistic at the same time, for its concept can be used to describe the politics and society in some extent, while it can also contradict the reality of events and incidences happening in the society at present. Theoretically speaking, the concept of realism is such an ideal state, where all forces and concepts in the context of politics and society is existent and pleasant, however, due to its idealism, its application becomes unpractical, for in reality, it is a given fact that all the elements and factors are interrelated and are able to interact with one another. With this, it is essential that nations are able to assess its responsibility and ability to govern its nation, and evaluate what theory or concept is suited for its type of government. The concept of realism excludes a variety of realities and possibilities, particularly the fact that nations and politics are subject to changes that must be cope up with and used in the advantage of the society. Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com

Introduction to Theories

Introduction to Theories Introduction to Politics Theory Does Hobbes’ theory of the social contract provide a convincing reason for...

KLUCKHOHN AND STRODTBECK’S VALUES ORIENTATION THEORY

KLUCKHOHN AND STRODTBECK’S VALUES ORIENTATION THEORY   ABSTRACT People’s attitudes are based on the relatively few, stable values they hold. Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck’s (1961) Values Orientation Theory proposes that all human societies must answer a limited number of universal problems, that the value-based solutions are limited in number and universally known, but that different cultures have different preferences among them. Suggested questions include humans’ relations with time, nature and each other, as well as basic human motives and the nature of human nature. Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck suggested alternate answers to all five, developed culture-specific measures of each, and described the value orientation profiles of five SW USA cultural groups. Their theory has since been tested in many other cultures, and used to help negotiating ethnic groups understand one another, and to examine the inter-generational value changes caused by migration. Other theories of universal values () have produced value concepts sufficiently similar to suggest that a truly universal set of human values does exist and that cross-cultural psychologists are close to discovering what they are. INTRODUCTION Cross-cultural psychology has two broad aims: to understand the differences between human beings who come from different cultural backgrounds, and to understand the similarities between all human beings. The similarities may be sought at all levels – from the physiological (our eyes are able to perceive colour) through the cognitive (we are also able to perceive perspective, or relative distance), to the personal (we can be both happy and sad, gentle or aggressive) to the social (we all relate to our parents and siblings), to the cultural (we all share cultural norms with others of the same cultural background). These cultural norms can take a variety of forms. They may be quite concrete and specific, like the type of clothing we find acceptable on a given occasion, or extremely complex and abstract, as are our religious beliefs. An important type of norm is the concept we have of ourselves in relation to other objects and people. These may range from our belief about the nature of human nature (1992), to the opinions we hold (our political opinions, for instance) to the attitudes we have toward a variety of concepts which we hold. Attitudes have long been studied by psychologists – especially social psychologists. For the first half of the twentieth century, it was believed that if we could measure them accurately, they would enable us to predict human behaviour. And predicting behaviour is what all psychology is about. However, as we became more psychometrically sophisticated, and able to measure attitudes accurately with instruments such as the Likert summated ratings scale, we learned that attitudes are much more complex than we had realised, and that they have to be measured very carefully, and a number of other factors such as context and strength taken into account before any accuracy of prediction could be claimed. Moreover we all have so many attitudes, they change so readily, and they vary so much over time and situation, that any one attitude can predict only a relatively small amount of behaviour. Social psychologists therefore started looking for more fundamental, slower changing concept which might give more reliable behavioural prediction. One such concept is the values which a person holds. Values are seen as being relatively few in number. Perhaps the best-known student of values is (1979), who suggests that there are at most 36 values held by human beings. Moreover they are considered to be widely, and perhaps universally held. Concepts such as honesty and courage, peace and wisdom, are recognised in all human cultures. On the other hand, (1980, 2001), in a huge world-wide study, has been able to find no more than five which are universally held. Nevertheless the idea that there are basic human values, and that they are measurable, has been exciting psychologists to investigate them for many years, from  in 1931 to the present day. It has been widely accepted that uncovering those values, and devising means of measuring them, would facilitate valuable insight into the similarities and differences between human beings from differing cultural backgrounds. One theory of basic human values which has been very influential is that of Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck (1961). Florence Kluckhohn and Fred Strodtbeck set out to operationalise a theoretical approach to the values concept developed by Florence’s husband, Clyde Kluckhohn (1949, 1952). He argued that humans share biological traits and characteristics which form the basis for the development of culture, and that people typically feel their own cultural beliefs and practices are normal and natural, and those of others are strange, or even inferior or abnormal. He defined a value as: “A conception, explicit or implicit, distinctive of an individual or characteristic of a group, of the desirable which influences the selection from available modes, means and ends of action.” (Kluckhohn, 1951). Florence Kluckhohn and Fred Strodtbeck developed a theory which put these principles into action. They started with three basic assumptions: <ul type="disc" style="margin-bottom: 0in"> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph"> “There is a limited number of common human problems for which all peoples must at all times find some solution”. </li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph"> “While there is variability in solutions of all the problems, it is neither limitless nor random but is definitely variable within a range of possible solutions”. </li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph"> “All alternatives of all solutions are present in all societies at all times but are differentially preferred”. </li> </ul> They suggested that the solutions for these problems preferred by a given society reflects that society’s values. Consequently, measurement of the preferred solutions would indicate the values espoused by that society. They suggested five basic types of problem to be solved by every society: <ul type="disc" style="margin-bottom: 0in"> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph"> On what aspect of time should we primarily focus – past, present or future?  </li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph"> What is the relationship between Humanity and its natural environment – mastery, submission or harmony? </li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph"> How should individuals relate with others – hierarchically (which they called “Lineal”), as equals (“Collateral”), or according to their individual merit? </li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph"> What is the prime motivation for behaviour – to express one’s self (“Being”), to grow (“Being-in-becoming”), or to achieve? </li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph"> What is the nature of human nature – good, bad (“Evil”) or a mixture? </li> </ul> Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck also suggested a sixth value dimension of Space (Here, There, or Far Away) but did not explore it further. They then speled out the possible answers to each of the questions, arguing that the preferred answer in any society reflects the basic orientation of the society to that aspect of its environment. The orientations to each question are shown in Table 1. Table 1. Four basic questions and the value orientations reflected in their answers.   Question   Orientation   Description   Time   Past   We focus on the past (the time before now), and on preserving and maintaining traditional teachings and beliefs.       Present   We focus on the present (what is now), and on accommodating changes in beliefs and traditions.       Future   We focus on the future (the time to come), planning ahead, and seeking new ways to replace the old.   Humanity and Natural Environment   Mastery   We can and should exercise total control over the forces of, and in, nature and the super‑natural       Harmonious   We can and should exercise partial but not total control by living in a balance with the natural forces       Submissive   We cannot and should not exercise control over natural forces but, rather, are subject to the higher power of these forces.   Relating to other people   Hierarchical (“Lineal”)   Emphasis on hierarchical principles and deferring to higher authority or authorities within the group       As equals (“Collateral”)   Emphasis on consensus within the extended group of equals       Individualistic   Emphasis on the individual or individual families within the group who make decisions independently from others   Motive for behaving   Being   Our motivation is internal, emphasising activity valued by our self but not necessarily by others in the group       Being-in-becoming   Motivation is to develop and grow in abilities which are valued by us, although not necessarily by others       Achievement (“Doing”)   Our motivation is external to us, emphasising activity that is both valued by ourselves and is approved by others in our group. In proposing orientations to the Nature of Human nature question, Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck suggested that there are two dimensions involved – good, bad or mixed, and that of mutability, or whether we are born the way we are and cannot change, or can learn to change (in either direction). Moreover they suggested that “mixed” may mean either both good and bad, or neutral. Taking all these considerations into account simultaneously gives us the possible orientations shown in Table 2. Table 2. Orientations possible in answering the question on the Nature of Human Nature.   Question   Orientation   Description   Nature of Human Nature   evil/mutable     Born evil, but can learn to be good.  However danger of regression always present.       evil/immutable     Born evil and incapable of being changed.  Therefore requires salvation by an external force.       mixture/mutable     Has both good and bad traits, but can learn to be either better or worse.       mixture/immutable   Has both good and bad traits, and their profile cannot be changed       neutral/mutable   Born neither good nor bad, but can learn both good and bad traits       neutral/immutable   Born neither good nor bad, and this profile cannot be changed       good/mutable   Basically good, but subject to corruption       good/immutable   Basically good, and will always remain so. Having set out their theory, Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck then proposed a means of measuring the orientations it produced. They suggested intensive interviewing be used, with a series of probing questions exploring each of the value dimensions with the interviewee. However they also recognised that many people find it difficult to think in the abstract, so suggested that real-life situations be outlined which involved the particular value being investigated. This led to the moral dilemma approach used by Kohlberg in his studies of morality a decade later. Moreover Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck also stressed that the real-life situations used must be appropriate to the culture of the people being studied. This was an early attempt to provide a solution to the emic-etic dilemma outlined by  (1969) some years later, and appears similar to the solution to the dilemma proposed by  in the 1990s. To test their theory out, Kluckhohn & Strodtbeck interviewed members of five different cultural groups in the South-West USA. These included itinerant Navaho, Mexican-Americans, Texan homesteaders, Mormon villagers, and Zuni pueblo dwellers. In doing so, however, they did not attempt to develop measures of the Nature of Human Nature orientations, finding them too complex. For the remaining four dimensions, however they were able to develop real-life situations relevant to all five cultural groups, and questions to probe the value orientations used by members of those cultures in dealing with the situations involved. They were then able to draw value profiles of each group, showing the ways in which they differed from each other, and the ways in which they were similar. All of this work was published in their 1961 book, and immediately made a strong impact on cross-cultural psychologists. Since then other theorists have also developed theories of universal values – notably  (1979),  (1980, 2001) and (1992). However the theory developed by Kluckhohn & Strodtbeck remains widely used and has sparked a good deal of research – as any good theory should. A conference of users of the theory in 1998 ( 2000), for instance, attracted over 400 delegates. Applications of the Theory Nevertheless the question remains: what use is such a theory? The work of  (1984, 1992) clearly demonstrates a very practical employment of a theory of universal human values. Russo has worked for a Native American tribe, the Lummi of Washington state, for more than two decades, using the Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck theory to help them bring themselves to an ever higher standard of living. The Lummi have their own reserve territory on the Western coast near the Canadian border. There they pursue their traditional industry of deep sea fishing, as well as more recent trades such as liquor retailing. Their success in these and other enterprises depends on their being able to relate successfully to the predominantly white American majority population surrounding them. The majority population forms the bulk of potential customers for their products, and at the same time is the prime source of food, clothing and manufactured goods. Moreover its members control such vital necessities as access to power, water and timber. Members of the cultural majority must also be negotiated with concerning issues such as taxes and transport. The Lummi have therefore realised that it is vitally important that they understand the cultural mores of the majority if they are to interact successful with them. Issues such as the assumed basic motives for behaviour, the importance or otherwise of tradition, relationships between older and younger generations, accepted modes of decision-making, etc have to be understood before harmonious and successful discussion can take place. Toward this end Russo has developed measures to assess the preferred value orientations of the majority, and of the Lummi themselves. Differences and similarities have been clearly demarcated, and each party to potential negotiations made aware of them. Thus when Lummi leaders go to discuss trade, taxes, utilities or transport with local business people and officials, they are aware of the world views of those with whom they are discussing, and of the similarities and differences between themselves and their neighbours. Such foreknowledge has resulted in a successful and harmonious relationship between the two cultural groups for many years. This testifies to both the importance of understanding each others’ values, and the efficacy of the Kluckhohn & Strodtbeck theory in doing so. Another way in which the theory has been used is to examine changes in cultural mores over time. An example of this were the studies undertaken by(1977, 1980) and  (1976) of changes in the disparity in values between young people and their parents as a result of migration. Using the Kluckhohn & Strodtbeck theory, they developed a fixed-alternative, 25-item questionnaire to assess respondents’ value orientations in the five question areas. Having tested the questionnaire for reliability and face validity, they had it translated and back-translated into several appropriate languages. It was then tape-recorded in each of these languages, as read by a native speaker of each language. The tape recording was then used as the prime instrument in orally administering the questionnaire. Using this technique they administered it to young people, both male and female, aged between 16 and 18, and to their parents, both mother and father. Samples were taken from some of the cultures from which large numbers of people migrated from the South Pacific to New Zealand in the 1960s and 70s – Samoa, Fiji and the Cook Islands. Moreover samples within each of those countries were taken not just from the main towns, but from selected remote back-country villages as well. Comparison groups of both Maori and Pakeha (white) New Zealanders were also obtained. Data was analysed in terms of the inter-generational disparity in values demonstrated by each group.     Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com

KLUCKHOHN AND STRODTBECK’S VALUES ORIENTATION THEORY

KLUCKHOHN AND STRODTBECK’S VALUES ORIENTATION THEORY ABSTRACT People’s attitudes are based on the relatively few, stable values the...