CONFLICT THEORY

• conflict theory arose primarily as a reaction

against structural functionalism and in many
ways represents its antithesis. Where
structural functionalism sees a near harmony
of purpose from norms and values, conflict
theory sees coercion, domination, and power.
Dahrendorf saw both theories as addressing
different situations, depending upon the focus
of the study.
• According to Dahrendorf, functionalism is
useful for understanding consensus while
conflict theory is appropriate for
understanding conflict and coercion.
• For Dahrendorf the distribution of authority
was a key to understanding social conflict.
Authority is located not within people but
within various positions. Authority is created
by the expectation of certain types of action
associated with particular positions, including
subordination of others and subordination to
others.
• Various positions of authority exist within
associations. The fault lines that spring up
around competing loci of authority generate
conflicting groups. The conflict between these
groups pervades their interaction, with the
result that authority is often challenged and
tenuous.
• Much as Merton looked at latent and manifest
functions, Dahrendorf identified latent and manifest
interests, or unconscious and conscious interests.
The connection between these two concepts was a
major problematic for conflict theory. Dahrendorf
posited the existence of three types of groups:
quasi- groups, interest groups, and conflict groups.
Dahrendorf felt that, under ideal circumstances,
conflict could be explained without reference to any
other variables.
 FOUR BASIC
ASSUMPTIONS
1. SOCIAL
CHANGE IS
UBIQUITOUS
2. CONFLICT EXISTS
BETWEEN THE
DIFFERENT ELEMENTS
OF SOCIETY
3. ALL ELEMENTS
CONTRIBUTE TO
CONFLICT IN ONE WAY
OR ANOTHER
4. SOCIETY AND SOCIAL
ORDER IS POSSIBLE
BECAUSE SOME MEMBERS
OF SOCIETY ARE ABLE TO
CONSTRAIN OTHERS
• Dahrendorf believed in two
approaches to society, Utopian
and Rationalist, Utopian being
the balance of values and solidity
and Rationalist being dissension
and disagreemen
• Dahrendorf believed that Marx’s theory could be
updated to reflect modern society and Roman
society. He rejects Marx’s two class system as too
simplistic and overly focused on property
ownership. Due to the rise of the joint stock
company, ownership does not necessarily reflect
control of economic production in modern
society. Instead of describing the fundamental
differences of class in terms of property,
• Utopians are represented by
the Functional theory of
society
• Rationalists are represented by
the Conflict theory of society
 Dahrendorf’s key concepts : the authority
conflict 
• Different people have different occupation
• The different occupation have different status
• People’s status increases or decreases
according to the link it has with authority. 
• In society there are many organizations.
• Each organization contains two groups
– super-ordinates (order-givers) with authority
– sub-ordinates (order-takers) without authority
• In authority relations there is a fundamental
conflict between: 
– those who have power 
– and those who do not have power 
 Dahrendorf’s key concepts Conflict  of
interest 
• the conflict is fundamentally based on two
type of interest
– Those With Authority: Their INTEREST  is to
maintain status quo 
– Those Without Authority: Their INTEREST is to
change status quo
• Power is essentially tied to the personality of individuals
• Authority is always associated with social positions or
roles
• Dahrendorf was most interested in studying authority
• When someone has authority in one setting, that
authority does not extend to other social arenas: a boss
holds legitimate authority at work but outside of the work
setting they cannot legitimately tell people what to do.  
• Dahrendorf is only concerned in his presentation with
authority
 Dahrendorf’s key concepts : difference
between power and authority

Quasi groups
• Groups that are not well organized because they have latent
or natural interest but are well conscious  of their group
interest. 

Interest groups
• When the latent interest becomes manifest interest then the
group becomes conscious about their group interest. Due to
this they are organized and can put pressure on the rival
groups.
Conflict group
• When interest group evolved into an
organized group to overthrow the rival group
then it is a conflict group
 Dahrendorf’s key argumenT
• Higher the group interest consciousness
among quasi groups the more possibility of
intergroup conflict between super ordinate
and subordinate groups.
• More there is a link between organizational
authority and the distribution of rewards the
more possibility for conflict. 
• If the movement of subordinate group to
higher position is made more difficult the
more there is conflict.
• If the economic, political or social goals of the
organizations are less met then more there is
conflict.
• More intense the conflict the more possibility
of change
THANK YOU