Unit VII (7) L.H.

-4
The Individual the Organization, and Society
Syllabus:

Individualism and freedom, the individual and the organization, social

responsibility.
One of the more significant phenomena in present day events may well be the ability of the
designations in the title of this chapter to provoke discussions, sometimes very heated ones. It
is buzz words or popular words now a day.

Problems of individual right and responsibilities vis-a vis an aggregate have been topics of great
concern for a long time. The major disparities between percepts and realties on the American
social scene at present are seen by Skolnick as being centered in the lag between past
idealizations and already developed circumstances. While we profess (allow) social equality, we
are really stratified. Local autonomy with primary group controls, long viewed as an essence of
American functioning has given way to the depersonalizing effect of a remote centralized
government.

Discussions of the interrelation of individuals and groups in society often lead to a consideration
of the foundations of behavior. Individual and group activity has been treated through out this
book in the empirical and analytical framework that behavioral scientist adopt as a necessary
part of their approach to the study of human endeavor.

The normative questions of behavior in business settings have generated extensive discussion
of business ethics and the border impact on the communities of corporate functioning.

Most of the members of organizations would undoubtedly agree that there is more to their
activity than pursuit of the main goal for which their organization exists. The importance of
subsidiary goals and values may be of more concern to business organizations than to others.
Although social and education organizations feel some of the same stresses. Businessmen are
generally in agreement that, while the pursuit of profit is the main goal of enterprise, there is the
subsidiary goal of being a good citizen of the community.

Individualism and Freedom

The concept of an individual free from the constraints of a restrictive social or political structure
has been a significant part of a set of values that any casual observers have long felt to the part
of the American character. The stereotype paints the picture of American society as placing a
high premium on the importance of individual functioning; attainment in the economic sphere or
in other areas on a basis of one’s own abilities without any help or hindrance from the group
seem to be a central tenet of this ideology.
Individualism
Individualists promote the exercise of one's goals and desires and so independence and self-
reliance while opposing most external interference upon one's own interests, whether by society,
or any other group or institution.

Individualism makes the individual its focus and so it starts "with the fundamental premise that
the human individual is of primary importance in the struggle for liberation." Natural rights and
freedom are the substance of these theories. In the English language, the word "individualism"
was first introduced, as a pejorative, by the Owenites in the 1830s.

As commonly used, an individual is a person or any specific object in a collection. In the 15th
century and earlier, and also today within the fields of statistics and metaphysics, individual
means "indivisible", typically describing any numerically singular thing, but sometimes meaning
"a person." (q.v. "The problem of proper names"). From the 17th century on, individual
indicates separateness, as in individualism. Individuality is the state or quality of being an
individual; a person separate from other persons and possessing his or her own needs, goals,
and desires.

Individualism and society

An individualist enters into society to further his or her own interests, or at least demands the
right to serve his or her own interests, without taking the interests of society into consideration.
The individualist does not lend credence to any philosophy that requires the sacrifice of the self-
interest of the individual for any higher social causes. Societies and groups can differ, in the
extent to which they are based upon predominantly "self-regarding" (individualistic, and
arguably self-interested) rather than "other-regarding" (group-oriented, and group, or society-
minded) behavior. Ruth Benedict argued that there is also a distinction, relevant in this context,
between "guilt" societies (e.g., medieval Europe) with an "internal reference standard", and
"shame" societies (e.g., Japan, "bringing shame upon one's ancestors") with an "external
reference standard", where people look to their peers for feedback on whether an action is
"acceptable" or not (also known as "group-think").

The extent to which society, or groups are "individualistic" can vary from time to time, and from
country to country. For example, Japanese society is more group-oriented (e.g., decisions tend to
be taken by consensus among groups, rather than by individuals), and it has been argued that
"personalities are less developed" (than is usual in the West). The United States is usually
thought of as being at the individualistic end of the spectrum, whereas European societies are
more inclined to believe in "public-spiritedness", state "socialistic" spending, and in "public"
initiatives.

Individualism is often contrasted with either totalitarianism or collectivism, but in fact there is a
spectrum of behaviors ranging at the societal level from highly individualistic societies through
mixed societies (a term the UK has used in the post-World War II period) to collectivist. Also,
many collectivists (particularly supporters of collectivist anarchism or libertarian socialism)
point to the enormous differences between liberty-minded collectivism and totalitarian practices.

Individualism and Freedom: Vital Pillars of True Communities

Individualism is the view that each person has moral significance and certain rights that are
either of divine origin or inherent in human nature. Each individual exists, perceives,
experiences, thinks, and acts in and through his own body and therefore from unique points in
time and space. It is the individual who has the capacity for original and creative rationality.
Individuals can interrelate, but thinking requires a specific, unique thinker. The individualist
assumes responsibility for thinking for himself, for acting on his own thought, and for achieving
his own happiness.

Freedom is the natural condition of the individual. From birth, each person has the potential to
think his own thoughts and control his own energies in his efforts to act according to those
thoughts. People can initiate their own purposive action when they are free from manmade
restraints—when there is an absence of coercion by other individuals, groups of people, or the
government. Freedom is not the ability to get what we desire. Non-manmade obstacles such as
lack of ability, intelligence, or resources may result in the failure to attain one’s desires.
Freedom means the absence of coercive constraints; however, it does not mean the absence of
all constraints. It follows that freedom is a necessary, but not a sufficient, condition for
happiness.

Individual happiness can be defined as the positive conscious emotional experience that
accompanies or derives from the use of one’s human potentialities, including one’s talents,
capabilities, and virtues. The sense of belonging to freely chosen communities is an important
constituent of happiness.

Individualism denies that a community or a society has an existence apart from the individuals
that constitute it. A community or society is a collection of individuals—it is not a concrete thing
or living organism distinct from its members. To use an abstract term such as community or
society is to refer to certain persons sharing particular characteristics and related in specifiable
ways. There is no such thing as the general will, collective reason, or group welfare; there are
only the will, reason, and welfare of each individual in a group. A community or a society is
simply the association of persons for cooperative action. Coordinated group action is a function
of the self-directed and self-initiated efforts of each person within the group.

Although the individual is metaphysically primary (and communities are secondary and
derivative), communities are important because people need them to reach their potential for
happiness. Social bonds are instrumentally valuable for the satisfaction of individuals’ non-
social desires; affiliation is necessary for flourishing. A free political order, which respects
natural rights and allows for individual freedom, best nourishes the formation of voluntary
communities through which people choose to live according to their freely chosen common
values.
Genuine Communities Are Freely Chosen Communities

Assigning primary emphasis to the individual does not devalue social cooperation. Humans are
not only distinct individuals but also social beings. Cooperative action affords possibilities for
growth and brings benefits that otherwise would be unattainable by isolated individuals. Man’s
rationality allows him to cooperate and communicate with others. In a free society, all
cooperative social ventures are entered voluntarily. In fact, individualism provides the best
theoretical basis for a genuine community that is worthy of human life. Voluntary, mutually
beneficial relations among autonomous individuals are essential for the attainment of authentic
human communities. The uniqueness and worth of the person is affirmed when membership in a
community is freely chosen by the individuals that comprise it.

Individualism and independence liberate interdependence. In the recent bestseller Seven Habits
of Highly Effective People, Stephen Covey observes that interdependence is a choice that only
independent people can make. A positive, principle-centered, value-driven person who organizes
and executes his life priorities with integrity is capable of building rich, enduring, and
productive relationships with others. True independence of character enables a person to act
rather than be acted upon. Independence of character requires him to integrate certain
principles (virtues), such as integrity, courage, justice, honesty, and fairness, into his nature.
Interdependent people combine their own efforts with the efforts of others to achieve even
greater success and happiness. They are self-reliant and capable people who realize that more
can be accomplished by working together than by working alone. Interdependent persons choose
to share themselves with, learn from, understand, and love others, and therefore have access to
the resources and potential of other people.

True Communities Respect the Primacy of Free Persons

Freedom, justice, virtue, dignity, and happiness all must be defined in terms of the individual;
however, the pursuit of individual happiness will naturally and almost always occur in
communities. People have needs as individuals that cannot be met except through cooperation
with others—it is impossible to achieve human fulfillment in isolation. A true community respects
free persons. Genuine communities arise when people are free to form voluntary associations to
pursue their individual and mutual interests. Inherent in respect for persons is respect for the
forms of association they choose for that purpose.

Individuals do not begin in a condition of isolation—to exist is to coexist. Birth, by nature, takes
place within families including parents, siblings, grandparents, aunts, uncles, and cousins. Those
family members, in turn, have numerous memberships in a variety of communities and voluntary
associations. In a free society, individuals tend to belong simultaneously to many different
communities. To varying degrees, each person identifies with particular familial, religious,
geographic, occupational, professional, employment, ethnic, racial, cultural, social, political, or
other communities. These communities are usually, but not necessarily, local and severely
limited in size by the number of people with whom an individual can have a personal
acquaintance and relationship and share a recognizable common interest. Continuing
technological advances in communications and transportation enhance people’s ability to select
the communities that best meet their needs and aspirations.
Minimal Government Allows True Communities to Flourish

The bonding together of citizens into voluntary communities and associations enables them to
remain independent of the state. Life in freely chosen communities is better for the person than
life as a dissociated individual in a large nation-state. Skeptics of state power favor the
placement of as many intermediate voluntary groups as possible between the state and the
individual—these mediating institutions help individuals realize their objectives more freely and
more completely. The principle of subsidiarity holds that the state should restrict its activities to
those that individuals and private associations cannot effectively perform. Decisions are most
wisely made by individuals and local organizations closest to the pertinent everyday realities
and by the next highest level only when the capabilities of actors at lower levels are exceeded.
Subsidiary allows free individuals to thrive in authentic communities without the intervention of
the state.

The purpose of the state is not to help people either materially or spiritually to pursue their
visions of happiness—that is the role of individuals, communities, and other voluntary
associations. The proper function of the state is no more than to protect people in the pursuit of
their own happiness. This simply means preventing interference from others.

Since active governments are inimical to the formation and operation of voluntary communities,
the generation of such communities is facilitated by the minimal state—one that operates within
the constraints of liberal individualism. Rich and rewarding personal relationships based on
voluntary cooperation and mutual assistance abound within minimalist, rights-based systems.
The freedom of individuals is a necessary condition for the formation and vitality of true
communities.

The Development of Individual Differences

It is most fascinating opportunities for one who is a parent is to be able to watch the emergence
of an individual right before his eyes. This is interest and recognition that adult patterns are
formed very early in the individual’s life may be reason enough for the student of behavior to be
interested in the developing of a person. Wordsworth expressed this by stating that “the child is
father to the man.”

This concern with the early years of development has been seen the behavioral science
primarily in the activity of child psychologists with their mapping and interpretation of various
aspects of the child’s functioning. But why should individuals in business be interested in
developmental patterns? The reason is that business depends on people and decisions that
must be made depend on knowledge of people and what they can do at particular times during
their lifetime. The history of a person moves form childhood, through adolescence, to adulthood.
In the past, the stages have been artificially delimited for study the child from the adolescent,
the adolescent from the adult. It is study by child psychologist and adolescent psychologist. The
developmental psychologist studies the span of life cycle of individual.
Interest in continuing even further along the developmental span has increased in recent years.
The problems of adjustment and activity and their application to the senior citizens, the study of
the aged people is on the increase.

The researcher interested in the abilities and aptitudes of the human person may focus on
fundamentals or be interested in applications of knowledge.

Those interested in specific areas such as business and industry, education, and government
may find that much work has been done which will help them to understand human behavior in
their setting.

The individual and the organization

Discussion of individual freedom and autonomy are being framed increasingly around the
relationships between individuals operating within larger social structure. This strong concern in
present day society for the fate of the individuals faced with big government, mass organizations
and organized activity all spheres of life is not a new one. Last half century, however concern for
the individual in the organizational setting has shown an increase, undoubtedly the result of the
significant growth in size, number, and importance of the organizational form of activity. Many
scholars from Montesquieu, Marx has highlighted the importance of individual in organization.

One of the better known dissertations on the social impact of organizational activity is by Whyte
in The organization man, where he develops his description of the individual in corporate society
in a way that puts the focus on the deficiencies of the system with respect to its providing a
basis for personal growth or actualization.

Whyte says people do not just work for the organization, they belong to it. Men and women work
as a team and give up much of their individuality as they do so. Most of people follow the
societal responsibility. Individuals in corporations may not be kings, barons, or popes, but the
comparisons may provide a stimulus for further analysis of the organizational activity.

The economic and administrative realities of present day functioning more for social
responsibility. The concept that appears to be emerging, as the answer of the modern individual
to this challenge, is the concept of the team. It is an old concept but it is being put to new uses.
As a member of a team an individual can find full opportunity for self-expression and still retain a
dynamic relationship to other relationship to other individuals.

Can there be true incorporation of the individual in a group without his willing it? It others
impose their ideas of what is best in group activity for the individual, is this really the growth
factor for a person?

Organization
An organization is a social arrangement which pursues collective goals, controls its own
performance, and has a boundary separating it from its environment. The word itself is derived
from the Greek word organon, itself derived from the better-known word ergon.
In the social sciences, organizations are studied by researchers from several disciplines, the
most common of which are sociology, economics, political science, psychology, management,
and organizational communication. The broad area is commonly referred to as organizational
studies, organizational behavior or organization analysis. Therefore, a number of different
theories and perspectives exist, some of which are compatible,

• Organization – process-related: an entity is being (re-)organized (organization as task or

action).
• Organization – functional: organization as a function of how entities like businesses or
state authorities are used (organization as a permanent structure).

Organization – institutional: an entity is an organization (organization as an actual purposeful

structure within a social context)

Organization in sociology
In sociology "organization" is understood as planned, coordinated and purposeful action of
human beings to construct or compile a common tangible or intangible product. This action is
usually framed by formal membership and form (institutional rules). Sociology distinguishes the
term organization into planned formal and unplanned informal (i.e. spontaneously formed)
organizations. Sociology analyzes organizations in the first line from an institutional
perspective. In this sense, organization is a permanent arrangement of elements. These elements
and their actions are determined by rules so that a certain task can be fulfilled through a system
of coordinated division of labor.

By coordinated and planned cooperation of the elements, the organization is able to solve tasks
that lie beyond the abilities of the single elements. The price paid by the elements is the
limitation of the degrees of freedom of the elements. Advantages of organizations are
enhancement (more of the same), addition (combination of different features) and extension.
Disadvantages can be inertness (through co-ordination) and loss of interaction.

Management is interested in organization mainly from an instrumental point of view. For a

company, organization is a means to an end to achieve its goals - which are to create value for
its stakeholders (stockholders, employees, customers, suppliers, community).

Social Responsibility
The suggestion that a business organization has some obligation to the society in which it
operates is bound to engender controversy whenever the point is raised. On the one hand,
there are those who consider that the corporation, because of its size and power, should be
even more concerned with its responsibility to society. If individuals are called on to maintain
some social consciousness and act responsibly in the community, even more should the legal
but factious person, the corporation do. Even if single individual are called upon to participate in
United Fund drives, contribute to other charities or serve in community endeavors, the
corporation can do so as an entity beyond encouraging its members to action.
The role of business organizations must often maintain a healthy economic existence with
benefits to the community accruing directly from this position. Levitt state that business is
making money, not welfare. It welfare does not come automatically under this system; it
becomes the government’s job. The officers of he Company only manage the money and
operating under a trust for the benefit of the stockholders. The extensive distribution of
scholarships or direct grants to college and universities and the support of community projects
or artistic activities such as symphony orchestra and opera is an indication of the extent to
which companies have expanded their activities in a community oriented framework.

Social responsibility may thus fit within a traditional economic framework. Some commentators
view the tremendous power of the corporation and consider that the corporation and consider
that the interest in the social responsibility of business is really an attempt by anxious
businessmen to legitimize the awkward state of a business that has outstripped the controls that
would keep it functioning in the public interest. Earlier concerned the need introduce legal
constraints on those private entities which have become so large and powerful that they
constitute a private government with as much power as public government.

While this view of the social responsibility of business which regards it as a dangerous
rationalization is shared by many, different conclusion have been reached.

Social responsibility
Social responsibility is an ethical or ideological theory that an entity whether it is a government,
corporation, organization or individual has a responsibility to society at large. This
responsibility can be "negative", meaning there is exemption from blame or liability, or it can be
"positive," meaning there is a responsibility to act beneficently (proactive stance).

Businesses can use ethical decision making to secure their businesses by making decisions that
allow for government agencies to minimize their involvement with the corporation. (Kaliski,
2001) For instance if a company is proactive and follows the United States Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) guidelines for emissions on dangerous pollutants and even goes an
extra step to get involved in the community and address those concerns that the public might
have; they would be less likely to have the EPA investigate them for environmental concerns. “A
significant element of current thinking about privacy, however, stresses "self-regulation" rather
than market or government mechanisms for protecting personal information” (Swire , 1997)
Most rules and regulations are formed due to public outcry, if there is not outcry there often will
be limited regulation.

Critics argue that Corporate social responsibility (CSR) distracts from the fundamental
economic role of businesses; others argue that it is nothing more than superficial window-
dressing; others argue that it is an attempt to pre-empt the role of governments as a watchdog
over powerful multinational corporations (Carpenter, Bauer, & Erdogan, 2009).

Socially responsible
Corporate social responsibility (CSR), also known as corporate responsibility, corporate
citizenship, responsible business, sustainable responsible (SRB), or corporate social
performance, is a form of corporate self-regulation integrated into a business model. Ideally,
CSR policy would function as a built-in, self-regulating mechanism whereby business would
monitor and ensure their adherence to law, ethical standards, and international norms. Business
would embrace responsibility for the impact of their activities on the environment, consumers,
employees, communities, stockholders and all other members of the public sphere

For each business, different measures are taken in consideration to classify a business as
"socially responsible". Each business attempts to reach different goals. There are four areas that
should be measured regardless of the outcome needed: Economic function, Quality of life, Social
investment and Problem solving] that is trying to be achieved should be measured to see if it
meets with the cost guidelines that the business is willing to contribute.

Why is social responsibility important?

In recent years many consumers have been upset by widely publicized examples of fraud by
executives and harmful products produced by some companies. As a result consumers have
become more conscious of whom they are doing business with and which products they should
buy. Many companies who are looking for long-term profitability are looking for ways to become
more socially responsible.

Likewise, the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) states: “In the wake of
increasing globalization, we have become increasingly conscious not only of what we buy, but
also how the goods and services we buy have been produced. Environmentally harmful
production, child labor, dangerous working environments and other inhumane conditions are
examples of issues being brought into the open. All companies and organizations aiming at long-
term profitability and credibility are starting to realize that they must act in accordance with
norms of right and wrong.”

Challenges of the Future

Business organizations are attempting already, whether for reasons of social responsibility or
not, to do something about some of the social inequities that surround their very headquarters in
large urban areas. With a greater understanding of the dynamic qualities of human behavior,
they will, perhaps be ready to cope with initially strange social phenomena because they have
coped successfully with more inanimate financial and economic mechanisms. A final statement
on the complex social processes involved in pressing domestic and international demands on
our society defies delineation within the limiting constraints.

Chapter 7 Summery
Concepts covering the relationships of individuals and the social entities to which they belong
have been topics of great interest for a long time. Most of the discussions have been lively and,
all too often, based on inaccurate perceptions of the actual for individual and social behavior.
Ethical concepts have edged into recent considerations by behavioral scientists because many
are beginning to recognize the need for some ultimate use of scientific data in a way that has
normative bases. This is increasingly true of applications of data to business.

Individualism represents a significant part of the American stereotype, and the values inherent
in the drive toward individual attainment may still be strong today. Concern for individual
freedom may be voiced today, but the bases for this concern ma vary. Some analyst’s feat that
individuals too often adopt an artificial self as the result of pressured by peers while other
researchers may concentrate on meaning and responsibility as prime motivating forces. Anxiety,
too, may be a basic drive in everyday living; it can be constructive in providing an impetus to
action. For some individuals, those prone to conformity, anxiety can be stressful and debilitating.

The right to privacy is an area where many of the concerns for individual freedom are coming
into focus. Freedom from invasion by psychological or mechanical means is considered to be
crucial to individual dignity in any organizational or primary setting.

The role of the individual in a modern business corporation (and many other kinds of
organizations) has attracted additional researchers and commentators. Critical outpourings are
easy; the difficulty lies in using the beneficial aspects of the organization to achieve a goal
without stultifying single individuals in the process. We have no choice as to whether
organizations stay; what can be done, however, is to make sure that these are able to serve the
needs of those involved in them.

Social responsibility of business organizations also has been a central topic in discussions of
the role of business in society. Views emphasizing that the duty of business is to make money
undoubtedly are exceeded by those recognizing the broader impact business can and does
make on the large social scene. Justification for this activity lies within the nature, purpose, and
goals of corporate action.

The excessive use of corporate power has also been a point of concern what the matter of
responsibility is raised. Increasing diffusion of the basis for control in addition to the awareness
of responsibility makes this aspect less troublesome.

Programs designed to improve the image of business have changed complexion through the
years. Most recently, the concern for social values has been expressed in the declaration of war
on poverty and other social problems.

Challenges of the future for individuals, organizations and society seem to center on the
problem of maintaining the individuality of each member of the social unit at the same time the
improvements in organization and community functioning are taking place. The survival of a
healthy society is our most significant task.