Ideal type

About: Ideal type is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 400 publications have been published within this topic receiving 8012 citations.

Management, Theology and Moral Points of View: Towards an Alternative to the Conventional Materialist-Individualist Ideal-Type of Management

Abstract: Weber's (1958) argument suggests that there are four ideal-types of management, and that conventional management is underpinned by a moral-point-of-view associated with a secularized Protestant Ethic, which can be characterized by its relatively high emphasis on materialism (e.g. productivity, efficiency and profitability) and individualism (e.g. competitiveness). Weber calls on management scholars and practitioners to become aware of their own moral-points-of-view, and to develop management theory and practice that de-emphasizes materialism and individualism. Our paper responds to this challenge, as we draw from an Anabaptist-Mennonite moral-point-of-view to develop a radical ideal-type of management that is characterized by its emphasis on servant leadership, stakeholding, job crafting and sustaincentrism. Implications for management theory and practice are discussed.

A Critical Appraisal of the Church-Sect Typology

Abstract: C HURCH and Sect are two much-used concepts in the sociology of religion. They have been applied to many manifestations of the Christian faith and today seem to be in as good favor as ever as basic tools in the analysis of the structure of groups in the Christian tradition. Though sociologists are only partly agreed on the definitions of Church and Sect, the concepts have been applied frequently, especally to the complex and interesting field of American Protestantism. The way that sociologists have construed these concepts seems to have narrowed their range of applicability and limited their usefulness in new fields of research. This paper has two aims: (1) to examine the accepted definitions of Church and Sect with an eye to sharpening them and attempting to delineate the path by which they may be integrated into a general sociology of religion, and (2) to develop some immediate implications of the reformulated typology in the area of American Protestantism. The classical statement of the Church-Sect typology was made by Ernst Troeltsch. Max Weber also made substantial contributions. Although the typology was posed as an ideal type, thereby consisting in a set of general structural features all of which need not be manifested in every case, the low state of development of ideal-type methodology has meant that for practical purposes each of the two concepts refers to a loosely integrated listing of empirical characteristics.' The main attention of this paper is given to those sociologists who have endeavored to bring conceptual order out of an array of characteristics. It is they who have used the typology most profitably from a research standpoint, but even so it appears that in reducing it to manageable proportions they have discarded precisely those aspects that may be most promising both in new research areas and in conceptual growth. The reformulation proposed below will modify the significance of the research undertaken under the previous definition but it will not jeopardize established insights. Perhaps it will clarify the place of Church and Sect in the sociology of religion and lay down an important methodological principle in this field. Troeltsch conceived of Church and Sect as separate and distinct, representing two radically different structural and value orientational tendencies in Christianity. He defined the Church as an institution that is sole keeper of the means of grace 2 and that dispenses this to its communicants through rites which may be performed only by ordained functionaries. Connection with the Church is a recognized obligation of maturing children of affiliated families. In social ethic the Church is conservative, accepting as much of the secular social order as it can. The Sect is a voluntary association of persons committed to an ethico-religious ideal, which its members attempt to manifest in their own behavior.3 There is no priestly mediation of grace nor is grace conceived to be the property of the Sect. In social ethic the Sect is either revolutionary, seeking radically to reform the existing social order, or passively critical, ultimately withdrawing into small communities where the pure religious ideal can be practiced. Since Troeltsch was primarily interested in the social ethic of Christian groups, their attitudes toward the secular culture assumed a definitive position in his typology. He assumed that Sects were essentially at sharp * Revised version of paper read at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Society, September, 1955. 1This type of approach is exemplified by the following works: Elmer T. Clark, The Small Sects in America, Nashville: Abingdon-Cokesbury Press, 1949 (revised), pp. 6, 9-24; Charles S. Braden, "The Sects," The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 56 (March, 1948), pp. 53-54. 2 Ernst Troeltsch, The Social Teaching of the Christian Churches (translated by Olive Wyon), New York: The Macmillan Company, 1932, v. 1, p. 331 ff. 3 Ibid.

“We, the polish nation”: Ethnic and civic visions of nationhood in post-communist constitutional debates

Abstract: Cet article fait part de recherches concernant les definitions de nation et nationalisme dans les ex- pays communistes et particulierement en Pologne. A la lumiere de l'ideal-type de Weber, l'A expose les differences de conception des modeles ethnique/civique qui oppose traditionnellement Orient et Occident sur la nation. En revenant sur l'histoire de la Pologne, l'A. se penche sur les representations de la nation-etat et explique la preponderence de la religion dans la formation de l'unite de l'etat-nation polonais

Dropping the E-Words from Small Business Research: An Alternative Typology

Abstract: DROPPING THE E-WORDS FROM SMALL BUSINESS RESEARCH; AN ALTERNATIVE TYPOLOGY(*) The words "entrepreneur" and "entrepreneurship" (the E-Words) continue to bedevil small business scholars. The reason is in the past. Economists originally identified entrepreneurs as those who were the instruments of major macroeconomic change. Max Weber and Joseph Schumpeter used the terms to critique the ideas of Karl Marx. The entrepreneur was an "ideal type," representing a class of individuals, to be used along with terms like "capitalist," "bourgeoisie," or "proletariat" (Collins 1986, Giddens 1971). Moreover, the entrepreneur was an agent of change, breaking the "circular flow" or macroeconomic equilibrium. Entrepreneurial change was discontinuous change, as entrepreneurs devised "new combinations" of economic forces. As a historical explanation of macroeconomic change, the concept of entrepreneurship worked quite well, reaching its most systematic development in the work of Schumpeter (1961). But for the concept of entrepreneurship to enter the mainstream of economic thought, it had to be quantifiable for use in elaborate economic models. Although many have tried to quantify the effects of entrepreneurship, the task seems impossible. Demsetz (1983) explained that an entrepreneurship variable cannot be used in predictive models. Successful entrepreneurship (the only kind that has an economic effect) is purely a matter of luck. Entrepreneurs are attempting to initiate major economic changes all the time, but conditions have to be right before any of them can make an innovative breakthrough. Which will be successful cannot be known until after the success occurs. No one can quantify the "unforeseeable" effects of entrepreneurial activity because, by definition, the entrepreneur is doing something new. Economic models describe entrepreneurial effects after the event, not before (Demsetz 1983). Unfortunately with all their problems, the terms "entrepreneur" and "entrepreneurship" have saturated the field of small business research, to the detriment of all because there are no commonly accepted definitions of the terms (Low and MacMillan 1988; Kent 1984; Kilby 1971; Wortman 1986). This is not a new problem (Livesay 1982), but with the current popularity of "entrepreneurship," definitional problems seem to be worsening (Gartner 1988; Carland et al. 1988). What can be done? Some feel the solution is to continually redefine the terms "entrepreneur" and "entrepreneurship" (Gartner 1988; Carland et al. 1988; Low and MacMillan 1988; Ronan 1988). Others have constructed elaborate models in an attempt to deal with "corporate entrepreneurship" (Spann, Adams, and Wortman 1988). But the terms are 300 years old and carry too much historical baggage. Researchers are trying to employ the concept of entrepreneurship in ways never intended by those who coined and developed it. However useful in historical studies of macroeconomic change, the concept of entrepreneurship is not helpful in small business research. THE WARRIOR EXAMPLE To begin the discussion, consider the term "warrior," another concept useful in historical narrative but of only limited application in particular cases. The actions of warriors have been a crucial element in the development of all societies, arguably more important than the actions of entrepreneurs. History, anthropology, and sociology are replete with accounts of the actions of warriors. For the sake of this argument, assume that the accepted definition of the term warrior is "one who engages an armed enemy in personal combat." Now imagine that a researcher is attempting to improve the performance of U.S. soldiers in combat. The researcher travels to a combat action to do field research, say, the 1965 Battle of the Ia Drang Valley in Vietnam between the U.S. 1st Air Cavalry Division and elements of two North Vietnamese regiments. Assume that our researcher has only the concept of "warrior" to help him understand the soldiers he is interviewing. …