The foundation of societies at the crux depends upon the presence of certain social

patterns for reciprocal behaviour between individuals or group of individuals. The technical
definition of what statuses is that they are the polar positions in the aforementioned social
patterns for reciprocal behaviour that occur in society.
To elaborate on it, the term status holds a double significance. In the abstract sense of
things, it is a position held by an individual in a particular social pattern. A social pattern
consists of some forms of social actions that are recurrent and have some probability of
occurring again. Social actions are behaviour in which a meaning is invested. Now, since
every individual participates in the expression of a number of patterns there are many
statuses an individual holds. In simpler words, status represents his or her position with
relation to the society in its totality and unless qualified in some manner, the term means
the sum total of all the statuses an individual occupies. Thus, my status as a member of my
community is derived from a combination of all the statuses I hold as an Indian citizen, as a
university student, as a daughter, a sister, and so on. The definition of what a status is also
has another dimension to it, as simply a collection of one’s rights and duties. However, it is
extremely hard to maintain a distinction in our thinking between statuses and the people
who hold and enable them since our rights and duties can only find expression through
individuals who serve as the instruments of expression.
A role on the other hand is the dynamic aspect of a status. Status and role are intertwined
with one another and are in a manner, hand in glove. When an individual puts his or her
rights and duties (which constitute the status, as mentioned before) a role is being
performed by him or her. In the essence of it, there are no roles without statuses or statuses
without roles. Moreover, a major similarity between the two is that the double significance,
as in the case of a status, applies here as well. Every individual also has a series of roles
which are derived from the various patterns in which he or she participates.
It is apparent that the more adjusted the members of any society are adjusted to their
statuses and roles the more smoothly a society shall function. This adjustment poses its own
dilemma since no two individuals are alike and all social systems possess certain roles which
require more than just training for successful performance. The training for a status from
birth may not suffice as the utilisation of every individual’s unique talents is of utmost
importance. So, these gifts prove themselves to be of great use to society but the
manifestation of these talents in individual might be rather late to be harnessed and
channelled into the desired roles properly. To approach this predicament, two types of
statuses have been developed, the ascribed and the achieved. Ascribed statutes are those
that are assigned to us by birth, without any heed being paid to our abilities or
shortcomings. My ascribed status would be belonging to a financially well off family as
compared to someone belonging to a lower middle class income family. Whereas, achieved
statuses are, simply put, those that come with effort and are not assigned to individuals at
birth. These require special qualities although they aren’t limited to this dimension. So,
being a student at Jesus and Mary College or being a best friend are examples of my
achieved statuses. However, my role as a student is to come to the institution, learn from
my teachers and interact fruitfully with my peers. So, the majority of statuses in all social
systems which take care of the ordinary day-to-day business of living are majorly of the
ascribed type. Thus, the highly interrelated nature of the relationship of status and role is
apparent.