Examples of Journal Assignment

1. TAYLORISM : A MISINTERPRETED OON OR AN

IN!"MAN ANE
Welcome to Mc Donalds Sir/Madam! a mechanically beaming cashier
greets each customer at Mc Donalds outlets and proceeds to take the order.
n the same put!on cheer"ulness# the cashier takes the order $ith an addition
o" the regular o""ers and %uestions like Would you like some e&tra cheese on
your burger sir' (s the order is "inali)ed# it is $ired to a backend monitor
$here another employee rapidly assembles the re%uired items onto a plastic
tray by the counter in an e""icient manner $ith brisk strides back and "orth
"rom behind the color"ul "a*ade o" machines and blo$n up menu cards. (t the
back# in the kitchen# each employee is $orking on one product at a gi+en time.
,he entire outlet $orks in sync# like a single machine to gi+e "ast "oods an all
ne$ dimension and e""iciency. ,he $orking o" Mc Donalds is an e&ample o"
,aylorism in todays $orld.
Scienti"ic Management methodologies# also kno$n as ,aylorism $as
de+eloped by -rederick Winslo$ ,aylor. ,here are "our core management
principles $hich ha+e been put "orth by ,aylor. n a company like Mc Donalds#
the principles are incorporated in the $orking o" the outlet.
-irst . De+elop a science "or each element o" a mans $ork# $hich replaces the
old rule!o"!thumb method. n McDonalds# there is a science behind each
employees role $hich makes the system o" burger creation robust across
places# be it the $elcome or the amount the burger cutlet is "ried.
Second . Scienti"ically select and then train# teach and de+elop the $orkman#
$hereas in the past he chose his o$n $ork and trained himsel" as best he
could. /ach employee undergoes training to "unction in a certain manner in Mc
Donalds# he cannot add e&tra celery to impro+e the taste o" a burger as the
recipe is handed to him and he must comply
,hird. 0eartily cooperate $ith men to ensure all $ork being done in
accordance $ith the principles o" the science $hich has been de+eloped. /+ery
employee at Mc Donalds does his role in the creation o" the order in
synchrony to pre+ent any delay to the customer. (ll the rules laid out are
"ollo$ed to the $ord.
-ourth. ,here is an almost e%ual di+ision o" the $ork and the responsibility
bet$een management and $ork. ,he members o" management take o+er all
$ork "or $hich they are better "itted than the $orkmen# $hile in the past
almost all o" the $ork and the greater part o" the responsibility $ere thro$n
upon the men. ,here are instances $hen the employees cannot cope $ith the
rush that comes into Mc Donalds. n such situations# managers do not hesitate
to take an order and assemble the same on the tray i" necessary.
,hese are the "our principles $hich generated high e""iciency in "actories $hen
implemented. 1+er the last century# se+eral theorists ha+e argued the pros
and cons o" the scienti"ic management theory o" ,aylor.
( school o" thought belie+es that a myth has arisen o+er the years that ,aylors
$ork is a ma2or cause "or dehumani)ing the $orkplace. 1ne o" the aspects to
be considered according to this +ie$point is the $orkplace scenario at the time
o" creation o" this theory. Workers in ,aylors day minimi)ed $hat they
accomplished to assure the employment o" their "riends and neighbors. 3y
getting rid o" slo$!$orking and 4soldiering in all its "orms and realigning the
relationship bet$een the employer and employed# ,aylor managed to increase
the output o" each man and machine by nearly 1556. 73rogan# 85119 Scienti"ic
management philosophy must be +ie$ed $ith its emphasis upon the human
element# not generally associated $ith ,aylor73utler# 1::19.
n the $ords o" ,aylor# ;o$ in its essence# Scienti"ic Management in+ol+es a
complete mental re+olution on the part o" the $orkingman engaged in any
particular establishment or industry < a complete mental re+olution on the
part o" these men as to their duties to$ards their $ork# to$ards their
"ello$men and to$ards their employees 0e goes on to say that there must
me a change in the mindset o" the management as $ell to$ards the sub
ordinates and all the issues they "ace on a daily basis.
Many o" the scorned practices o" scienti"ic management may in "act be those
per"ormed by practitioners $ho are dishonest and opportunistic and used their
intelligence to e&ploit their subordinates. While it is belie+ed that ,aylor
preached treating employees inhumanly and like machinery in the
organi)ation# he in "act treated them like indi+iduals and addressed issues o"
class di""erences through his theory. 0e promoted gi+ing "air pay to an
employee and didnt belie+e in e&ploiting the $orker $ith more $ork "or lesser
$ages. t is also belie+e that money $as the only incenti+e "or the $orkers
$hen actually he treated the issue o" $ages as only a management problem
and ensured that people are $ell!paid.
Many o" the other tenets o" Scienti"ic management $ere considered to be
remarkable in impro+ing the $ork place. 0e e&pected his managers to kno$
the $ork better than their employees. 73rogan# 85119 ,he theory o" goal
setting goes back to scienti"ic management. ,aylors used o" tasks $as a
"orerunner to modern!day goal setting 7=ocke#1:>89. (n interesting aspect o"
,aylorism is the special consideration "or "emale $orkers. n ,aylors time# they
$ere made to $ork "or a salary $hich $as >56 to 1556 more than their male
counterpart. ,hey $orked "or t$o hours lesser each day and had "our
recreation periods in a day along $ith Saturdays being hal" day.
,he supporters o" ,aylor thus belie+ed that o+er the years# the concepts o"
Scienti"ic management ha+e been bungled up and i" properly "ollo$ed can
bene"it the organi)ation tremendously. (nother school o" thought belie+es
that ,aylors theory is a philosophy $hich is inhuman and reduces the spirit o"
man to a cog in the "unctioning o" the organi)ation.
?ose re"ers to ,aylors 4crippled and obsessional psyche $hile 3ra+erman
belie+ed he $as a 4neurotic crank.73ahnisch# 85559. n ,aylors time# the
bourgeois "eared the undisciplined and dangerous bodies o" $orkers and
"ound it a threat to the society. ,hus through separating the intelligence o" the
2ob "rom the $orker and making him mechanically "ollo$ the 4best practices#
he sub2ected them to the bourgeois. ;ot 2ust this# he used his methods to bring
order to their mo+ements and gestures. n the place o" autonomy# money and
a se&ed# classed identity $ould su""ice "or the $orking sub2ect. ,aylor# in the
opinion o" this second school# did not belie+e that the $orkman possessed the
intellect to do his 2ob e""ecti+ely and hence needs to be told e&actly $hat to do
by the management $ho possessed the intellect to percei+e the best practices
"or the gi+en 2ob. Most o" the principles put "orth by ,aylor ha+e been
critici)ed as in inhuman and spoke o" as reducing a $orker to a brainless cog in
the "unctioning o" the organi)ation.
(n industry $here ,aylorism is "ollo$ed today is in call centers $here the
$orkers ha+e to per"orm mental labour and respond to %uestions e&actly as
directed by the managers. ,he $ork is repetiti+e and the $orker cannot
de+iate "rom the decided standard ans$ers. ,hus in spite o" belie"s that
,aylors principles are arcane# they are +ery much in e&istence today. Whether
his principles ha+e been touted inhuman or ha+e been lauded "or helping the
organi)ation# it is e+ident that ,aylors Scienti"ic management principles added
tremendous +alue to the "ield o" 1rgani)ation theory. ,hrough his analysis and
keen perception he de+eloped model mo+ements in the human body "or each
role the $orker per"orms $hich $ould enhance e""iciency to the ma&imum. 0is
contributions took care o" $orker "atigue and impro+ed their per"ormance.
Some belie+e that his principles are e&cellent and ha+e been misinterpreted
through the ages $hile others belie+e that they $ere do$nright inhuman.
/ither $ays# -rederick Winslo$ ,aylor $ill al$ays be kno$n "or being the
"ather o" Scienti"ic Management.
Referen#es
1. 3rogan# 8511 < /&onerating -redrick ,aylor < @esse. W. 3rogan# ndustrial#
;o+ember 8511
8. 3utler# 1::1 < -rederick Winslo$ ,aylor. the -ather o" Scienti"ic
Management and 0is Ahilosophy ?e+isited < B. ?. 3utler# ndustrial
Management# May/@une 1::1
C. =ocke#1:>8 ! ,he ideas o" -rederick W ,aylor . (n /+aluation# (cademy o"
Management ?e+ie$# @anuary 1:>8
D. 3ahnisch# 8555 ! /mbodied Work# Di+ided =abour. Sub2ecti+ity and the
Scienti"ic Management o" the 3ody in -rederick W. ,aylorEs 1:5F =ecture on
Management ! Mark 3ahnisch# 3ody and Society# Gol H# ;o 1
$% E&u#ational S'stem(s role in so#ial soli&arit'
Durkheim throughout his li"e $as concerned about the social "abric that $ill hold the society
tohether. ha+e $rittent his paper tryng to e&plain ho$ the /ducation ndustry7the $ords in itsel"
are a parado& to be used together9 is "unctioning to promote solidarity# $ith special re"erence to
ndian Schools. ha+e also included the incidents that ha+e personally e&perienced during my
schooling.
DI?J0/M. /milee Durkheim $as born in 1>K># in Lpinal in -rance# and died in 1:1F# to a +ery
traditional -amily. 0is "ather $as a ?abbi and he $as supposed to "ollo$ suit# till he lost "aith $hen
in
college. ,hough# he regained his religious "aith in @udaism later in his li"e. n EF:# he $as admitted
to the Lcole ;ormale SupMrieure. 0e $as "or some time a pro"essor at the Ini+ersity o" 3ordeau&.
,hen he became politically acti+e in the 1:D5s Ncorrection. 1:>DO# especially in the so!called
Drey"us (""air. ,hen in 1:58# he became pro"essor at the Ini+ersity o" Aaris# $hich is not %uite as
distinguished as Lcole ;ormale SupMrieure. Durkheim $as scienti"i%ue# in the sense o" being +ery
rigorous in his analysis. 0is son $as killed in the $ar# and shortly a"ter this he died in Aaris.
,he young Durkheim has been a "unctionalist and a positi+ist# and then late in his li"e he has!!his
epistemological turn!!he became a cultural analyst789. DurkheimEs impact $as much more "ocused
on sociology. n E:C he $rote a dissertation# $hich probably is still his most in"luential book# ,he
Di+ision o" =abor in Society# his Ah.D. dissertation#E:K# it $as "ollo$ed by ,he ?ules o"
Sociological Method# $hich is his most positi+istic statement. ,he Di+ision o" =abor is his most
"unctionalist $ork. (nd then in E:F he $rote Suicide. Suicide is a +ery important book because itEs
really the "irst piece o" rigorous empirical social science# $hich takes a +ery unusual# +ery rare
phenomenon. n 1:1K he $rote this book#,he /lementary -orms o" ?eligious =i"e# $hich is a ma2or
break in his $ork# and sho$s his rene$ed interest in the spiritual and the metaphysical. W0=/
Mar& and Weber are con"lict theorists# Durkheim is a theorist $hich tries to understand $hat holds
society together.
3e"ore begin my analysis# t$o basic concepts nead to be understood# they are ,he =a$ in Are!
modern and Modern Societies and Mechanical Solidarity and 1rganic Solidarity
T)e La* in Pre+mo&ern an& Mo&ern So#ieties
Durkheim begins the analysis by taking the la$ as the point o" departure. the argument is then in
pre!modern societies the la$ $hich e&isted is primarily a repressi+e or penal la$
in modern society
,he legal system is based on contractP the essence o" modern legal system is contract. tEs not that
$e do not ha+e a penal code!!right'!!the penal code sur+i+es. 3ut $hat is no+el is contractual la$#
$hich is restituti+eP $hich is not about punishing e+il# but simply restitute the damage somebody#
by breaking a contract# caused to the other contracting partner.
Mar& $ould say it is a ne$ legal system $hich emerges $ith legal!! $ith capitalism# and Weber
$ould say this is the essence o" legal!rational authority.
Me#)ani#al Soli&arit' an& Organi# Soli&arit'
mechanical solidarity is $hich describes pre!modern societies# and this is a solidarity $hich is
based on the similarities o" the parts. Well this is $hy you can ha+e a penal la$# because a penal la$
does not make a distinction bet$een contractual partnersP it assumes a sameness o" the group as
such. (nd mechanical solidarity!!right'!!as said# is primarily based that $e see oursel+es similar
in the group. 1rganic solidarity# so $ill Durkheim argue# is one $hich is based on di""erences in
society. ( higher le+el o" di+ision o" labor in society produces organic solidarity. 1rganic# he meant#
it is a kind o" biological analogy.
much like WeberEs notion o" traditional authority and legal!rational authority# he is also using this to
understand society!!social solidarities in contemporary li"e. So mechanical solidarity does e&ist in
contemporary society as $ell. (nd he makes this re"erence to "inding a marital partner# $hom $e
$ant to date $ith# and $hom $e consider to marry
Dur,)eim an& S#)ooling:
n 1>:K /mile Durkheim# a -rench sociologist# sought to e&plain ho$ it $as possible "or some
societies to hold together despite the centri"ugal "orces unleashed byurbani)ation and
industriali)ation 7Durkheim# 1:>K9.,raditional communities# he argued#had been held together by a
mechanical solidarity# based on similarities among people. 3ut no$ in the 81st century# the
similarities ha+e become less important and less e+ident# as he had rightly redicted. ,here is
disparity and there is concentration o" po$er. ,he class struggle has taken a clear shape today.
,here are 8 groups in $hich the entire $orld can be di+ided# the pri+ileged and the Inderpri+ileged.
,hose in the Inderpri+ileged category has a budding unrest in it. (n ndication o" this unrest $as
nuclear "amilies increasing# strikes# lockouts# $age hike protests# increasing crime and iolence. s
the social "abric $eathering do$n' t is the +e&ed %uestion# but $hat is e+en important is ho$ it can
be repaired and put back in place.
Durkheim argued# some societies de+eloped a ne$"orm o" solidarity or cohesion# based on peoples
recognition o" their mutual dependency.0e likened this dependency to the relationship o" indi+idual
persons in a society to the parts o" a li+ing body. each organ must carry out its o$n "unction
properly to insure itso$n $el"are and that o" the other organs 7hence organic solidarity9. Durkheim
presents a dichotomy consisting o" t$o types o" social
bonds that e&ist in societies# i.e. social systems# in order "or societies to "unction coherentlyP
the mechanical solidarity and the organic solidarity $hich represents t$o types o" collecti+e
consciousness.
Mechanical solidarity is about ho$ la$# punishment and social norms o" right and $rong is
determined and e&ecuted and thus create con"ormity# uni"ormity# and social likeness in a
society. 1rganic solidarity is created by the di+ision o" labor among $orkers $ho ha+e
become speciali)ed indi+iduals that due to this sui generis# i.e. uni%ueness# are indi+idual and
less con"orm 7=ukes# p. 1KC9. ,his means that the more con"ormity and alignment o" the
collecti+e consciousness the more mechanical solidarity# and the more indi+iduali)ation in a
social system# the more organic solidarity.
7http.//studenttheses.cbs.dk/bitstream/handle/15D1F/8FK1/troelsQmQkranker.pd"'se%uenceR19
3ut# today the 1rgans ha+e been speci"ied# isolated and di""erentiated against. ,o e&plain this# lets
consider the 3lood "lo$ in the body as the prio+ileges in the society. ,he heart as it pumps the
blood $ould get the ma2or part o" the blood and hence en2oys highest pri+ileges# So does the 3rain
as it gets most o" the blood pumped "rom the heart. ,hen the hierarchy is "ollo$ed by the organs
like the =i+er and ntestine. ,hese are then "ollo$ed by the hands and then by legs# both o" $hom
recei+e considerabely less pri+ileges than these organs $ho ha+e a higher supply o" blood "lo$ and
the legs recei+e the least. ;o$# the hierarchy is established and o"course# the happiest $ould be
those $ith concentration o" blood. While the legs and the hands $ould be diossatis"ied# and may
re+olt. " they do so# the body $ould be ali+e but# $ould not be able to mo+e or li+e a happy li"e#
$hich is the ultimate goal.
,his is $here schooling may come in e+en in todayEs modern conte&t# $here di+ision o" labour is
clear and has sketched out lines. Durkheim hypothesised that Schooling is an important instrument
"or building organic solidarity# as it pro+ides indi+iduals kno$ledge and understanding o" the
comple&structure o" society and their place in it# and as it pro+ides the skills and +alues re%uired "or
participation in society. ,he role o" schooling in maintaining solidarity $as long neglected.
Pro-lems of So#ial .o)esion To&a'
With the ad+ent o" the ndustrial ?e+olution came Ethe 3u)) $ord o" De+elopmentE. (t the time
$hen Durkheim $orked on hid theories# ,he ndustrial ?e+olution had 2ust stared# and the process
o" migration "rom +illages and o$ns to cities had begun. 3ut no$ that so many yeas ha+e gone by#
the $orld is not 2ust E,he WorldE. t is a $orld that is an amalgamation o" Aoor Sountries# De+eoping
Sountries and De+eloped Sountries.
So $here does /ducation come in no$' n simple language# teach the star+ed to accumulate "ood#
teach the hungry to get "ood and teach the rich to respect "ood. ,he role that education system7no$
ndustry9 plays in maintaining social solidarity is immense. 3ut it should also be catering to the
demands o" di"erent people around the $orld. /&ample in countries $here clans "ight# education
may imbibe the +alue o" nationalism and not belonging to their clan# $here regions do# a shi"t "rom
regionalism or secessionism to nationalism and $here religions do# "rom belonging to a religion to
belonging to a nation or to the human race# and in all C cases maintaining peace# la$ and order and
social coheion.
Jeeping the $ork o" ;oel -. McBinn titled E/ducation Aolicies,o Aromote Social SohesionE#
published in (ugust 855F as my re"erence# ha+e di+ided the $orld in C categories# unlike the
Kcategories he does# and they are as "ollo$s.
,he "irst category is the relati+ely poor societies. ,hey are usually characterised by hostile#religios
and uneducated groups or segments o" people li+ing together. ,he economic resources are limited#
and hence these groups $ant to ha+e $hate+er they possibely can. ,he competition -1? A1W/?
(;D economic resources is clearly e+ident. Irbanistaion is limited and +iolence is usually
common. -or control o" the scanty resources# e+en Si+il $ars are not a rarity/&ample $ould be our
neighbousr like 3angladesh# Aakistan# Sri =anka and ohers like Timbab$e#Sudan# Syria and
Somalia# to name a "e$.
,he second category is the de+eloping Societies. ,hese are countires $ith Middl ncome and a
charecterised y disparity in ncome. ( clear section o" rich and poor e&it# $ith "riction amongst the
8 categories. ,he ones $ith the capital or the land or resources are the pri+ileged.ndustries are
de+elpoing at a "ast pace and $ith modernisation# the importance and +alue o" skilled labour is
coming do$n. ,he concentration o" $orker skill is less and hence lo$ on importance gi+en to
education. ,he di+ersity is imminent as most o" the $orkers# no$ city residents# $ere originally
"rom the +illages. ,his is so as they ha+e started de+eloping late. Isually# as an obser+ation# these
countris ha+e a dominanat clan or religion. Aolitical instability is lesser than then poor# but is still
signi"icant. ,he economic instability has someho$ not been absorbed in the society "ully. With the
ad+ent o" "oreign in+estments# these disarities ha+e e&ponentially gro$n. ,he social Sohesion is at
alarming le+els at places# -or /cample
Soncerns in =atin (merica about increasing ine%uality and social instability ha+e prompted
se+erale""orts to design policies to impro+e cohesion 7-eres U Gergara# 855HP nter!
(mericanDe+elopment 3ank# 855HP So2o U Itho""# 855H9. Sountries in this category
can becategori)ed as lo$ in both mechanical and organic solidarity. /&amples $ould be ndia#
3ra)il and South ("rica to name a "e$.
,he third category includes the De+eloped Sountries in the $orld. ,hese are usually the countries
$ho ha+e reaped the bene"its o" ndustrialisation early and ha+e thereby had a settled social
cohesion# and also political stability. n the past decade# though the social "abric has sho$n signs o"
$eakening.
,he Social Sontract is $eakening and so is the intimate relationships among people 7McAherson#
Smith!=o+in# U 3rashears# 855H9. ,he crime rates are alarming# $hich sho$s the concern "or the
society is on the decline. /+en though economic gro$th is e+ident and so is /ducational
opportunities7 $hich are considered to be the "actors presumed to produce cohesion9# the social
contract has de"initely $eakened.
E&u#ation
Social cohesion is in"luenced schooling and by the income ine%uality in the society. ,he income
ine%uality is a""ected by Inionism# ta&es# state policy#minimum $ages# collecti+e bargaining#
labour la$s and policies # as $ell as the le+el o" skill and e""iciency o" the $ork"orce# strictly related
to schooling./ducational 1pportunities depends on the proportion o" population reaching schools#
the disparity in the le+el o" education and employment opportunities etc. ( small but signi"icant
relationship is "ound bet$een educationaline%uality and rate o" +iolent crime 7Breen# Areston and
@anmaat et al.# 855H9
ndi+idual le+els o" education are signi"icantly correlated $ith measures o" attitudes o" tolerance
to$ards others# and tolerance is sometimes included as a measure o" social capital 7Autnam# 85559.
With greater tolerance $ill be greter peace and hence greater cohesion. ,his tolerance is directly
linked to mutual trust# +iolence and crime rates. ,he impact o"education is +isible as. educational
programs in a number o" countries ha+e reduced the public e&pression o" racist +ie$s 70agendoorn
U ;ekuee# 1:::9# and to a certain e&tent e+ent the racist opinions and perspecti+e may ha+e
declined $ith their public e&pressions.
Breen et al.7NBreen#855C# V8FP Breen# 855HVDF9O concluded that the impact o" the sociali)ation
e""ect o" education is mediated by the e&tent to $hich the structure o" the education system
contributes to achie+ement o" e%ual educational outcomes and opportunities. 0e also identi"ied
se+eral "actors that contribute to e%ual educational outcomes. ,hese include a single national
curriculum# te&tbooks andassessment methods# non!selecti+e neighborhood schools that recei+e
e%uali)ed "unding"rom a central ministry# and public attitudes that all children are competent.
Selection o" students is delayed until upper secondary. ne%uality is higher in systems that
initiateselection in lo$er secondary or primary# permit school choice# o""ers multiple curriculaand
tolerate une%ual "unding and sta""ing.
,he collecti+e consciousness o" a social system is not dependent o" geographic placement and
pro"essions. t does not change $ith e+ery ne$ generation $ithin a society but instead
connects generations $ith each other 7Durkheim# p. 15K9.
,he purpose o" education is not only to pro+ide the best possible pedagogy# but also to pro+ide it to
all# and not 2ust to pro+ide it to all# but pro+ide the same learning e&perience and le+el o" learning to
all. ,his is the conte&t $onder is satis"ied in ndia by any stretch o" imagination' s the ndian
/ducation system not a method $here the ?ich get the ebst possible learnings and keep their
comiong generation rich and learned# $hile the poor cannot a""ord these and hence keep their
coming generations poor. -unding o" /uducation by Bo+ernment and pri+ate institution does
matter# but is it really regulated' S it not so that $ith the gro$in bill o" -ees# gro$s the "acilities
a+ailable and hence the le+el o" learning and the e&perience o" learning. ( Ini"orm course structure
"or all $ould ensure uni"ormity# but does this e&ist''
(nd the "undamental idea in Durkheim about collecti+e consciousness!!as said# it is analogous to
the notion o" the general $ill in ?ousseau# or the notion o" class consciousness in Mar&.
Durkheim de"ined collecti+e consciousness as W XYthe set o" belie"s and sentiments common
to the a+erage members o" a single society 7$hich9 "orms a determinate system that has its
o$n li"e4P it is by de"inition di""used throughout the $hole society# but it none the less has
speci"ic "eatures $hich make it a distinct reality4. 7=ukes# p. 1K19
Durkheim thought o" the indi+idual consciousness to consist o" t$o partsP one part shared
$ith society# $here society li+es and acts $ithin usP and one part $hich contains our
personality traits and makes each indi+idual uni%ue 7=ukes# p. 1D:9
3oth the parts are to be de+eloped and Moulded using the /ducation System# but $hen di""erent
ndi+iduals get di""erent le+els o" schoolings# the part shared $ith the society and the indi+idual too#
doest get de+eloped to satisa"actory le+els. ,his is $hat leads to $orkers resorting to +iolence and
the poor resorting to crime# because their ndi+idual consciousness shared $ith the society has not
de+eloped. ,his is $here the ci+ilised#sophisticated and $ell educated Ipper Slass ha+e the con"lict
$ith the underpri+ileged Aoor class.
Referen#es:
http.//har+ard.academia.edu/;oel-McBinn/Aapers/D:H:C5//ducationQpoliciesQtoQpromoteQsocialQ
cohesion
Sollins Dictionary o" Sociology# pD5H adapted "rom S. =ukes# /mile Durkheim. 0is li"e and
Work 71:FC9 =ondon.(llen =ane
http.//$$$.britannica.com//3checked/topic/1K>HFHF/mechanical!and!organic!solidarity
http.//snap.stan"ord.edu/class/cs88D$!readings/da+isHCbalance.pd"
Zale Ini+ersity =ecture on [Durkheim and ,ypes o" Social Solidarity[