Levels of sociological analysis of economic behavior. Abstract: Models and strategies of economic behavior. Economic behavior as a subject

Ministry of Communications and Information

Educational institution "Higher state college communications"

Faculty distance learning

Test No. 1.

by discipline

"Economic Sociology"

4th year student of group MS-861

Gorbar Oksana Anatolevna

Option 13

Subject. Models and strategies of economic behavior.

Plan.

1. The concept of “economic behavior.” Principles of economic behavior.

2. Models of economic behavior.

3. Deviant economic behavior.

4. Economic behavior: types and forms of manifestation.

1. The concept of “economic behavior.” Principles of economic behavior. In the literature on economic sociology, there are many approaches to defining the content of the concept “economic behavior”.

The generally accepted interpretation of this concept in domestic science is the approach of G. N. Sokolova, according to which economic behavior- this is behavior associated with the enumeration of alternatives for the purpose of a relatively rational choice, that is, a choice in which costs are minimized and net benefit is maximized, largely determined by the state of economic consciousness in society, economic thinking, economic interests and social stereotypes of individuals and groups.

The concept of economic behavior implies the presence of multidimensionality, ambiguity, multivariance, prerequisites and outcomes of human actions and actions.

Economic behavior is carried out on the basis of certain principles:

1. Value orientation maximizing intentions and actions, without which the principle itself turns into a formula for “maximizing anything.”

2. Personal economic interest, in which the meaning, subject, direction and result of the maximizing action are concentrated.

3. Interdependence of personal assessments those economic goods at which maximizing actions are aimed, and their price “analogues” that synchronize the subjectively incommensurable scales of values ​​of many people.

4. Certain degree of qualification associated with the calculation of likely benefits and costs.

5. Sustainable aspiration of economic entities act within an acceptable balance of benefits and costs.

6. Inevitable inaccuracy, the relativity of calculated economic actions associated with obtaining benefits, and the resulting likelihood of errors and incorrect actions.

2. Models of economic behavior. In economic sociology, such models of economic behavior are distinguished as monetary, marketing, investment, entrepreneurial, etc.

Monetary behavior is a derivative social institution money, which ensures the distribution, dosing and calculation of economic resources in the exchange process.

Actions related to money can be based on different models (see Diagram 2).

Scheme 2. Models of monetary economic behavior

Investment behavior- these are actions related to the existence of a social financial and investment institution that operates with various kinds of obligations with the aim of constantly redistributing capital from those who have it to those who need it.

Innovative behavior(entrepreneurial) - these are actions based on an innovative component that allows you to generate entrepreneurial income. This is a specific type of economic behavior focused on a certain probability of achieving the marginal rate of profit extracted in a system of market uncertainty.

3. Deviant economic behavior. In economic behavior, along with generally accepted ones, there are deviant types. Deviant behavior in the economic sphere is often referred to as organizational and labor violations. There are various reasons that can lead to behavioral deviation in the sphere of labor and economics.

These are:

Limited ability to adopt accepted behavior;

Simple ignorance;

Social-comparative motive;

Innovation, demonstrative behavior;

Non-participation in management.

4. Economic behavior: types and forms of manifestation. The formation of market relations, their greater or lesser social orientation, the existing structure of employment create their own special preconditions for the economic behavior of different groups in the social community. Through economic forms of activity, the subject (individuals, strata, social groups) realizes the ability to correlate their way of thinking, their economic knowledge and ideological attitudes with real economic practice in order to solve social problems. economic tasks. The completeness of the subject’s realization of his essential powers indicates both the extent of his involvement in economic activity and the ability of the latter to stimulate this activity.

Many thinkers (especially from the end of the 18th century) were interested in why individuals, pursuing their own interests and possessing extremely limited information, nevertheless managed to generate not chaos, but an amazingly organized society. One of the most insightful and most influential on the development of economic sociology was the English economist and philosopher Adam Smith. He lived in an era when even highly educated people believed that only through the attention of government agencies was society kept from a state of disorder and poverty. A. Smith did not agree with this. But in order to refute the generally accepted opinion, he had to discover and describe the mechanism of social coordination, which, as he believed, operated independently of the support of state structures. At the same time, the mechanism turned out to be so powerful that government measures that were in conflict with it were often nullified.

There are, according to A. Smith, five main conditions that “compensate for small monetary earnings in some activities and balance large earnings in others: 1) the pleasantness or unpleasantness of the activities themselves; 2) ease and cheapness or difficulty and high cost of learning them; 3) constancy or impermanence of occupations; 4) greater or lesser trust given to those persons who deal with them; 5) the likelihood or improbability of success in them.” alternative options chosen in each of the five conditions for making money, based on the inclinations and preferences of people, determine their economic behavior.

So, firstly, wages vary according to the ease or difficulty, cleanliness or untidiness, honorability or humiliation of the occupation. “The owner of a tavern or tavern, who is never master of his house and is subjected to the rudeness of the first drunkard, is engaged in a business that is not very pleasant and not very respectable,” says A. Smith, “but there is hardly any other profession in which an insignificant capital would bring such a large profit.”

Secondly, wages vary depending on the ease and cheapness or difficulty or cost of learning a given profession. A man who has learned, with the expenditure of great labor and a long time, any of the professions requiring dexterity and skill, expects that the work he has learned will reimburse him for all the expenses expended on the training, with an ordinary return on capital equal to at least this amount of expenses.

Third, wages vary in different occupations depending on continuity or interruptions in work. “Of all types of skilled labor,” writes A. Smith, “it seems that the easiest to learn is the work of a mason and plasterer. It is reported that in London during the summer season porters are often used as plasterers and masons. Thus, the high wages of this group of workers represent not so much a reward for their special skill as a compensation for the instability of work.

Fourthly, wages vary according to the greater or lesser confidence which the worker must enjoy. “We entrust our health to the doctor,” notes A. Smith, “our condition, and sometimes our life and reputation, to the attorney and lawyer. Such trust cannot be safely given to people who do not occupy a respectable social position. Therefore, their remuneration must reach such a level as to ensure their social position ... the long time and large expenses required for their training, together with this circumstance, inevitably further increase the price of their labor.”

Fifth, wages in different industries vary depending on the likelihood or improbability of success in them. “In a profession in which there are twenty losers for every one who succeeds,” says A. Smith, “that one must win everything that all twenty losers should have received.” These conditions determine the balance of real or imaginary benefits and costs on which the rational choice of an individual is based. In making this choice, the individual takes the action that will bring him, in accordance with his expectations, the greatest net benefit.

The choice of conditions for earning money, according to the sociological monitoring “Man and the Market,” divides respondents into two approximately equal halves: they would like to live, albeit poorer, but with a guaranteed level of income, without risk - 47.8%; to live richer, but taking risks, acting with initiative - 41.1% (11.1% did not answer). The former can be classified as representatives of the pre-market type, and the latter - original market type of behavior. Pre-market type of behavior is characterized by the formula “guaranteed income at the cost of a minimum of labor costs,” or “minimum income with a minimum of labor costs.” This type of behavior fit well into the image of the Soviet economy and was formed by a powerful command-administrative system that raised people incapable of making responsible decisions and taking risks. From year to year, according to sociological research, a stable trend was observed - 2/3 of respondents could work more efficiently than they do, if they had material interest.

In general, carriers of the pre-market type of behavior are characterized by rejection of the market or a wary attitude towards it, a low assessment of their own ideas about the market economy, a high level of social and psychological tension of the individual, who is strongly influenced by social stereotypes developed by previous conditions. This category of respondents is more concerned than others about further liberalization of prices and the threat of unemployment, the prospect of retraining and new employment (if this happens). Most of them associate the way out of the crisis with the establishment of order and discipline in all spheres of public life, with administrative measures in the economy. When making their choice of lifestyle and method of earning money, individuals, in conditions of declining living standards, first of all, expect to work more intensively in their current workplace (up to 1/3), rely on income from their personal plot (1/2) and hope for social guarantees (1/2). Thus, the choice made dictates a very specific range of activities of representatives of the pre-market type of behavior.

Original type market behavior (41.1%) can be characterized by the formula “maximum income at the cost of maximum labor costs.” He assumes high degree economic activity on the part of the individual, his understanding that the market provides opportunities for increasing well-being in accordance with the invested efforts, knowledge, and skills (in particular, the ability to take professional risks). The actual market type of behavior is just beginning to take shape and largely depends on the progress of economic reforms and their compliance with the social expectations of economically active individuals. The presence of a fairly flexible structure of value orientations allows them to relatively quickly adapt to new conditions of the social environment and adequately respond to changes in the basic requirements of social institutions.

The market type of behavior is almost entirely (over 95%) focused on entrepreneurship. However, the lack necessary knowledge half of the respondents, 80% of respondents have no connections in trade (even if they have money) and other circumstances significantly contribute to the modification of this type of behavior in pseudo-market. An active orientation towards entrepreneurship remains only among 1/3 of those with a market type of behavior; 2/3 of respondents, in conditions of declining living standards, are going to earn extra money in their free time, including 1/3 - to engage in repurchase and speculation, i.e. follow the formula “maximum income at the cost of minimal labor costs.”

The transformation of 2/3 of the original type of market behavior into pseudo-market behavior (including repurchase and speculation) reflects the inevitable costs of the emerging labor market. The need to earn extra money in his free time from his main job means that a person’s work at his workplace is not paid enough, and this forces him to resort to searching additional sources existence. The lack of a clear economic concept for the reconstruction of society leads some to a loss of motivation for professional creativity and innovation, while others are motivated to increase their well-being through adventurous risk (playing on fluctuations in the ruble exchange rate against foreign currency, etc.) with very dubious moral and ethical standards . The presence of a pseudo-market type of behavior in a particular social system indicates a low level of its development, the absence of a clearly expressed concept of this development, which is typical to one degree or another for developing countries.

The fundamental difference between pre-market and market types of behavior itself is that the latter has more flexible economic thinking and, accordingly, a more flexible structure of value orientations. The market type of behavior has more opportunities and prospects in modern conditions, but, nevertheless, for its implementation it is necessary to fulfill a number of conditions, both on the part of the state and on the part of the individual.

Using and developing A. Smith’s methodology for determining the economic behavior of people based on their preferences for certain ways of making money, P. Heine creates his own concept of economic behavior, directly resulting from the economic way of thinking of individuals: people choose, only individuals choose; individuals choose rationally.

Let's try, based on the concept of the American economist P. Heine, to look at this process through the eyes of a sociologist, who, unlike an economist, is not limited to considering a person as an unconditionally rational being. So, let's fix our attention on the fact that people make choices. Choice is so central to economic theory that some critics accuse it of treating even poverty and unemployment as a result of voluntary choice of people. Whether this is so, we will find out a little later, analyzing employment problems in the conditions of the emerging labor market.

Closely related to the problem of choice is the emphasis placed on the individual (without losing sight of the importance of group action and social relations). In reality, the choice is always made by the individual, so economists try to break down the decisions made in power structures into the decisions of individuals within these structures. The correctness of this approach seems controversial (or, in any case, requires serious justification), but the economic way of thinking really takes the individual as the original semantic unit.

Economic theory is sometimes criticized for its inherent emphasis on rationality. Economists believe that a person does not act on a whim, but after weighing the expected pros and cons of the options available to him, that he learns from his mistakes and therefore does not repeat them. In other words, the economic approach assumes that human actions are logically based on the calculation of costs and benefits. But are people really that rational? Are their actions influenced by unconscious impulses and uncontrollable emotions to a greater extent than theory suggests?

Economic behavior in its most general form is behavior associated with the selection of economic alternatives for the purpose of rational choice , that is, a choice that minimizes costs and maximizes net benefits. The prerequisites for economic behavior are economic consciousness, economic thinking, economic interests, and social stereotypes. Moreover, each phenomenon contributes something of its own and shapes one or another type of economic behavior in its own way.

So, for example, the technique of economic thinking is a certain prerequisite that a person is guided in his behavior. Based on the balance between the rationality and emotionality of their thinking, individuals take only those actions that will bring them the greatest net benefit (that is, the benefits minus the possible costs associated with these actions). Everyone is expected to act in accordance with this rule: the miser and the spendthrift, the buyer and the seller, the politician and the manager of the company, the cautious man who relies on preliminary calculations, and the desperate improviser.

In communicating with each other, especially regarding the distribution and consumption of limited economic resources, subjects pursue their economic interests and satisfy their immediate needs. This is the second prerequisite for their economic behavior, which allows us to largely predict it. In a society that makes extensive use of money, everyone prefers to have more of it, because money expands the possibilities of achieving one's own interests (whatever they may be). The latter circumstance is very helpful in predicting economic behavior.

It also proves useful when it comes to influencing the economic behavior of others. In the process of social cooperation, by acting in their own interests, people create choices for others, and social coordination is formed as a process of continuous mutual adjustment to changes in net benefit arising from their interaction.

The dynamism of a social stereotype, the fluid balance of a cognitive image and a pragmatic attitude (or their occurrence in a contradiction) create the preconditions for the choice of alternative options - formed values ​​of the global order or momentary benefits, interests of a general plan or private interests.

In fact, people are not that rational and their choice in a real situation is determined by: the state of balance between the rational and emotional in economic thinking; the fluidity of the balance between normative and individual in a social stereotype; and, finally, by deeper reasons (often beyond their control) - their economic interests.

These latter assume that the functioning of any institution (mechanism) is most easily understood as the result of market processes. Here attention is drawn to an important feature of economic theory: it does not at all assume that the market works better than alternative institutions, especially government ones. Rather, it is assumed that the functioning of any institution, no matter how bad or successful it may be, is most easily understood as the result market type processes. To exaggerate somewhat, we can say that economic theory does not consider market solutions better (or worse) than government ones, since for it government decisions are market solutions. The actions of government agencies are the result of market processes: individuals pursue their own interests and adapt to each other’s behavior, while observing the special “rules of the game” adopted here.

Another thing is how global and to what extent market relations are developed in conditions of the formal absence of a market. We can conditionally consider them zero and take them as a starting point when tracking the social consequences of economic reforms.

Economic theory, according to P. Heine, tries to explain any behavior of people as a result of choice. Appealing to the economic way of thinking allows us to explain social phenomena, including changes in the level of unemployment as a consequence of the changing ratio of expected benefits and costs. Unemployment in its explicit form is a relatively new phenomenon in post-Soviet society. Therefore, it is natural that the decision-making processes are dominated by stereotypes of the past, leading the person making the choice to maintain the status quo as the most preferable position. This partly explains that those released (especially women) agree to a part-time work week or part-time work rather than to any changes in their specialty or transition to the service sector (although the latter is largely hampered by the underdevelopment of this sector).

As it turned out, people prefer unemployment benefits rather than work caring for the disabled, the elderly, the sick, children, and unskilled physical labor. People don't agree to public Works, considering that this is humiliating to their dignity, uncomfortable for their psychological well-being. Obviously, as the duration of unemployment increases, the preferences that dictate the adoption of certain decisions will change. But to do this, you will have to overcome the passivity of economic thinking and choose between options: either retrain (with guarantees of subsequent employment), or agree to the proposed range of work, or put up with the status of unemployed.

It can be assumed that the rate of increase in the unemployment rate reflects not only a growing shortage of jobs, but also changes in the assessment of the expected benefits and costs associated with searching for work. Both the costs of entering a job and the costs of refusing it for different people will be very different depending on factors such as gender, age, experience, qualifications, obligations to the family, other sources of income, one’s own value orientations, prevailing stereotypes and even views those whose opinion a person values.

Economic decisions are based on expectations. People make decisions to enter the workforce because they expect to find a suitable position. If job seekers' expectations are unreasonably high, this will lead to higher unemployment rates. If, for example, graduates of secondary and higher educational institutions have inflated perceptions of the value of their diplomas in the labor market, their unemployment rate will increase. Inflation has the same effect on the unemployment rate, since it creates a “gap” between the expected and actually offered wages.

So, the unemployment rate consists of a whole complex of decisions that are made both by those who offer their labor and by those who demand it. Obviously, they all take into account the expected costs of giving up real opportunities as a result of their decisions. Moreover, the costs of unemployment are not the same for everyone: they take different forms for different individuals. For some, the main cost of unemployment is the loss of income; for others, such costs will be the loss of benefits that they value more than cash income (indifference to work, a sense of involvement in the business, communication with colleagues, the opportunity to make a career, etc.).

There is also no homogeneous mass of unemployed people bearing the same burden of unemployment. Finally, there is no constant value beyond which unemployment begins to pose a serious problem. There is no single policy suitable for reducing all types of unemployment. There is no clear line separating the unemployed from those who simply “do not work.” Ultimately, the difference between the burden of unemployment and the joys of leisure can only be made by the individual himself, assessing the ratio of the benefits of entering a job and refusing to work. Both depend on people's assessment of the relative benefits of the alternative opportunities presented. Different rates of unemployment among different groups of the population reflect not only differences in the demand for people's services, but also variations in the costs that different people face in finding, starting, or maintaining a job.

Using and developing the methodology of P. Heine (with access to types of economic behavior) in the sociological monitoring “Employment regulation in the emerging labor market”, we will analyze the situation on the labor market of the Republic of Belarus.

A study of the social and professional orientations of the unemployed in the conditions of the emerging labor market showed that, regardless of gender, age and level of education, the range and activity of negative orientations towards types of work that are not prestigious in public opinion, as well as towards moving in search of work to another city, village, borders of the republic. It would seem that increasing the duration of the unemployment period should narrow the range and reduce the activity of negative orientations towards prestigious types of work, but this is not happening yet. This phenomenon is explained by the specifics of the unemployed contingent, consisting of 4/5 people with secondary and higher specialized education, and the persistence of social and professional stereotypes generated by the traditions of Soviet society and not always coinciding with the development of market relations.

To increase the resolution of the analysis of a problem situation, we identify the main strategies of economic behavior, based on the respondents’ assessment of what their previous work meant to them as a value, and implemented in accordance with existing traditions and learned stereotypes.

Based on the attitude towards previous work exclusively as a source of material wealth (37.2%), a strategy for the so-called more pragmatic sky behavior. Its bearers are equally groups with secondary general (33.0%), secondary specialized (36.8%) and higher (38.7%) education; both men and women. At the same time, this type of behavior increases significantly with age and is three times more pronounced in the older age group.

What is the ratio of benefits and costs to which the carriers of this type of behavior gravitate? This category of unemployed people actively strives to acquire a new profession through retraining. Representatives of this category are actively looking for work, both in their specialty and in any field, and are taking courses (about 1/3 each); 1/7 are engaged in entrepreneurship and within 5% work in seasonal and temporary jobs. Individuals evenly and urgently use all opportunities to survive in an emerging market. At the same time, carriers of this type of behavior resolutely refuse unskilled physical labor and work caring for the sick and elderly due to its low pay. Not wanting to reduce material requirements, most of them do not agree to any job with lower pay than the previous one.

Based on the value perception of previous work in terms of developing abilities and professional career (31.8%), a strategy of behavior is formed, which can be called professional. The majority of carriers of this type of behavior (2/3) undergo retraining under pressure from circumstances. Up to half of them are looking for work only in their specialty, 1/4 - any job, 1/3 - take courses. Most do not accept any job with lower pay than their previous one, for reasons of self-esteem and previous professional status. As for personal prospects for employment, they are one and a half times less than those of the first category of individuals, and the terms of employment are longer.

Based on the attitude towards previous work, in which it “was of no value” or it was difficult to evaluate it in any way (31.0%), a strategy of behavior is formed, which can logically be called without time personal. It is characteristic that this type is almost unrelated to the level of education of respondents and gender. To one degree or another, it is associated with age, decreasing by 1.8 times as age increases. Representatives of this category are calm about the loss of their previous job and show a high degree of readiness to acquire a new profession (2/3 of them are ready to retrain). Only 1/5 of them are looking for a job in their specialty, 1/3 agree to any job, 1/3 are taking courses to obtain a new specialty. Their personal employment prospects are relatively successful due to the lack of professional ambitions.

The development of these strategies makes it possible to trace the logic of behavior of pragmatically, professionally and indifferently oriented individuals, the basis of their calculation of benefits and costs, and the rationality of choice. Tracking the logic of each type of behavior leads to the conclusion that each of them needs to be worked in its own way and each of them can be predicted in terms of the success of job searches, readiness to learn new professions, and orientation towards certain groups of professions.

If we trace similar types of behavior in people under 30, dividing them into graduates and the unemployed, we see a different picture. The pragmatic type of behavior covers 38.7% of graduates and 27.3% of the unemployed, professional - 36.0% of graduates and 39.2% of the unemployed; indifferent - 25.3% of graduates and 33.5% of unemployed.

Analysis of the research materials shows that the considered types of economic behavior are just emerging, just beginning to manifest themselves in specific economic behavior (as a selection of alternatives in order to maximize benefits) in the conditions of the emerging labor market. For example, the concerns of graduates about future employment and the unemployed about losing their jobs are dictated more by the current situation than by the presence of their own strategy that determines the rationality of choice.

It is equally difficult for both to be rational in the absence of economic information about the situation on the labor market and due to a chronic fear of doing anything independently. At the same time, among the unemployed, compared to graduates, the pragmatic strategy of behavior weakens by one and a half times and the indifferent strategy of behavior increases by the same amount. This may indicate a certain confusion and unpreparedness of yesterday's graduates for market collisions and requires the development of public policy in order to activate a professional strategy for economic behavior.

What is offered to a graduate on the labor market? What is the range of his alternatives and to what extent do they suit him? What is the scale of his preferences? As for graduates, they are most inclined to work under contracts and subcontracts, temporary and seasonal work, as well as work in the service sector. Moreover, such a disposition is most expressed in pragmatic and professional strategies.

As for the unemployed, their scale of preferences looks more uniform: work under contracts and subcontracts, part-time work, part-time work week, temporary and seasonal work and work in the service sector. At the same time, their pragmatic and professional strategy is weakened by almost half and becomes comparable to the strategy of indifferent behavior. The entry of the younger generation into the market without clearly defined professional orientations is not the best way to create a universal workforce necessary for economic reform. Finding ways to strengthen the professional strategy of economic behavior is the most important factor in the development of civilized market relations.

Literature

1. Sokolova G. N. Economic sociology. Mn.: “Higher School”, 1998
2. Babosov E. M. Economic sociology. Questions and answers. Mn.: “TetraSystems”, 2004
3. Galko I.K., Lomonosov E.Z. Economic sociology. Mn.: “Belarusian Science”, 2001
4. Internet

First of all, the problem of socio-economic behavior is the subject of study of economic sociology. This is a relatively new area of ​​sociological knowledge, which is successfully developing in the global scientific community, as well as in domestic sociology. Radaev V.V. highlights his approach to the problem of the subject of economic sociology.

The general approach often boils down to the following: basic economic categories are taken (“production”, “distribution”, “market”, “profit”, etc.) and filled with some non-economic content, showing the limitations of “pure economism”. It is hardly possible and hardly advisable to completely abandon such a sociological reinterpretation of basic economic concepts. However, one must understand that the absolutization of this approach can turn sociology into an “optional application” to economic theory, and the economic sociologist into a vague shadow of an economist trying to “correct” and surpass the not entirely successful original. In this situation, it seems advisable to choose a different path: to follow the actual sociological logic, presenting economic sociology as a process of deploying a system of sociological concepts into the plane of economic relations.

The methodological basis of such constructions is the complex interweaving of a number of scientific directions and branches of knowledge, and first of all:

* American new economic sociology and “socio-economics” (M. Granovetter, A. Etzioni, etc.);

* British industrial sociology and stratification studies (J. Goldthorpe, D. Lockwood, etc.);

* German classical sociology (K. Marx, M. Weber, W. Sombart);

* Russian economic sociology and sociology of labor (T.I. Zaslavskaya, R.V. Ryvkina, etc.);

* history of economic sociology (R. Svedberg, N. Smelser, R. Holton).

The first serious attempt to categorize economic sociology as such was made in the works of the Novosibirsk school. It is summarized in the book by T.I. Zaslavskaya and R.V. Ryvkina “Sociology of Economic Life”, published in 1991 (almost 30 years after the publication of N. Smelser’s book of the same name). The emphasis is essentially on two topics: “Social stratification” and “Economic culture”. Within the framework of the Novosibirsk school, in 1986, the teaching of the course “Economic Sociology” began, which was still under the strong influence of traditional political economy, but at that time, certainly innovative.

The tradition of sociological analysis of economic processes in society is based on a behavioral approach. In the center research activities there is the category “economic behavior” (the problem of “homo economicus”), which is the basis of both sociological and economic analysis.

M. Weber is rightfully considered the founder of the behavioral approach in the field of economic sociology. His theory of social action is the fundamental basis for sociological analysis of the economic processes of society. M. Weber, who built a typology of economic action, is characterized by a rationalistic approach, which makes it possible to construct an ideal, phenomenologically “pure” sample of economic behavior characteristic of a certain economic culture(“spirit of capitalism”).

V. Pareto, another prominent analyst of economic behavior, used a different paradigm for studying this phenomenon. Classifying economic action as rational (logical), he “brought out” a whole class of non-logical (irrational, affective) models and forms of social behavior, based on social standards, habits, stereotypes and traditions.

Analysis of the phenomena and factors of “illogical” behavior, denoted by the terms “precipitation” and “derivation”, revealed to sociologists the significant role of irrational and emotional components of social (economic) behavior, various kinds of predispositions, attitudes, prejudices, stereotypes, consciously or unconsciously masked and implemented in "ideologies", "theories" and beliefs.

An important contribution to clarifying the social essence and nature of economic behavior representative of the period of developing industrial capitalism was made by G. Simmel. He gave fundamental analysis the social institution of money as a rationally calculable basis for most human actions, which coordinates them and leads to a “common denominator”.

N. Kondratiev, within the framework of his probabilistic-statistical concept of social sciences, managed to extrapolate the behavioral approach to a wide area economic phenomena, creatively enriching the concepts of social action by M. Weber and P. Sorokin. The most significant aspect of his concept is the identification in the structure of economic processes of that social substratum, which is the field of study of sociologists. These are individual, group and mass acts of human behavior and their interactions, which give rise to such a relatively independent area as the economy.

The behavioral analysis of the economic processes of modern society received a productive continuation in the structural-functional approach of T. Parsons and his student N. Smelser. They gave an institutional and sociocultural interpretation of economic action as a subsystem of social action.

There are several models of economic behavior of individuals containing mechanisms of social coordination.

The first model, based on the methodology of the English economist and philosopher A. Smith, is based on the recognition of the compensatory role of wages as the basis of the economic behavior of the subject. The functioning of the model is determined by five main conditions that “compensate for small monetary earnings in some activities and balance large earnings in others: 1) the pleasantness or unpleasantness of the activities themselves; 2) ease and cheapness or difficulty and high cost of learning them; 3) constancy or impermanence of occupations; 4) greater or lesser trust given to those persons who deal with them; 5) the likelihood or improbability of success in them." These conditions determine the balance of real or imagined benefits and costs on which the individual's rational choice is based. Alternative options chosen in each of the five conditions for making money based on people's inclinations and preferences determine their economic behavior.

An analysis of the economic behavior of an individual, in the context of A. Smith’s methodology, shows that in the domestic economy, in the process of establishing market relations, two basic types of economic behavior of individuals clearly dominate: pre-market and market. The pre-market type of behavior is characterized by the formula “guaranteed income at the cost of a minimum of labor costs,” or “minimum income with a minimum of labor costs.” In general, carriers of the pre-market type of behavior are characterized by rejection of the market or a wary attitude towards it, a low assessment of their own ideas about the market economy, a high level of social and psychological tension of the individual, who is strongly influenced by social stereotypes developed during the years of the Soviet economy.

The market type of behavior is characterized by the formula “maximum income at the price of maximum labor costs.” It presupposes a high degree of economic activity on the part of the individual, his understanding that the market provides opportunities for increasing well-being in accordance with the invested efforts, knowledge, and skills. The actual market type of behavior is just beginning to take shape and largely depends on the progress of economic reforms and their compliance with the social expectations of economically active individuals.

The inevitable costs of labor market formation have led to the emergence of another type of economic behavior - pseudo-market behavior. The pseudo-market type of economic behavior is characterized by the formula “maximum income at the cost of minimum labor costs.” The presence of a pseudo-market type of behavior in a particular social system indicates a low level of its development, the absence of a clearly expressed concept of this development, which is typical to one degree or another for developing countries.

The second model, based on the methodology of the American economist P. Heine, assumes that the economic way of thinking has four interrelated features: people choose; only individuals choose; individuals choose rationally; all social relations can be interpreted as market relations. These conditions create a certain balance of real or imaginary benefits and costs on which the rational choice of an individual is based. In making this choice, the individual takes the action that will bring him, in accordance with his expectations, the greatest net benefit. Moreover, the more serious the economic justification for the choice, the greater the likelihood that it will be rational.

The necessary properties-limitations of the economic theory of P. Heine are, firstly, the recognition of the unconditional rationality of man; secondly, the absolutization of rational choice; thirdly, focusing on the possibility of making a choice by a single individual. By making rational choices based on the expectation of net benefit, individuals take certain actions that are predicted by other people. When the proportion between the expected benefit and the expected costs of an action increases, then people perform it more often; if it decreases, they perform it less often. The fact that almost everyone prefers more money to less money makes the whole process incredibly easier; money here is like a lubricant, extremely important for the mechanism of social cooperation. Moderate changes in monetary costs and monetary benefits in certain cases may prompt big number people to change their behavior in such a way that it is better coordinated with the actions of other people carried out at the same time. This is the main mechanism of cooperation between members of society, allowing them to ensure the satisfaction of their needs using the means available for this.

The limitations of the explanatory capabilities of P. Heine's economic theory are overcome in the course of creating a sociologized model of economic behavior. The latter includes: firstly, actions determined by collective choice; secondly, the irrational choices of individuals, which often take place in life and are associated with the presence of components of the unconscious in the structure of the human psyche; thirdly, actions determined by economic interests and social stereotypes. According to this model, the choice of individuals in a real situation is determined by: the state of balance between rational and emotional in economic thinking; the fluidity of the balance between normative and individual in a social stereotype; and finally, by deeper reasons (often beyond their control) - their economic interests. Pursuing their economic interests, people adapt to each other's behavior, observing the accepted rules of the game, adapting to the changing situation, trying to obtain the maximum net benefit (minus costs) as a result of their choices.

Analysis of the economic behavior of individuals in the context of P. Heine’s methodology makes it possible to create a typology of the economic behavior of individuals based, for example, on the assessment by various groups of unemployed people of what their previous profession meant to them as a value. The analysis identified, on this basis, strategies for pragmatic, professional and indifferent behavior of people who have lost their jobs. The strategy of pragmatic behavior is formed on the basis of the goal with which a graduate graduates (and an unemployed person graduates) from school, vocational school, secondary educational institution, university - to achieve material well-being and make a career. The pragmatic type of behavior, as a rule, is characteristic of different educational groups and almost does not depend on gender. At the same time, it increases significantly with age and is three times more pronounced in older age groups than in the group under 30 years of age. This type of behavior is closest to the market type itself.

Strategy professional behavior comes from the intention of getting an interesting job in the future. This type of behavior is most closely related to the level of education of individuals. Paradoxically, in the current transition period the situation is such that the more years it took to educate, the less horizontal mobility an individual has, and, consequently, the worse his social well-being.

The strategy of indifferent behavior comes from the fact that you just need to get an education. This type of behavior is almost unrelated to the level of education and gender of individuals. It has little to do with age, does not have clear subjective characteristics and trends in its changes. He is highly susceptible to the influence (both positive and negative) of all social developments and a specific social situation.

Each of the considered models contains the required number of system components, the interaction of which creates a stable structure of types of economic behavior of individuals. The action of each model of economic behavior is subject to a specific social regulatory mechanism economic relations, which opens up opportunities for scientific management of them, increases the reliability of prognostic assessments and creates the prerequisites for progressive changes in practice.

Within the framework of the concept of economic behavior, it is possible to explain social phenomena, including changes in the unemployment rate, as a consequence of the changing ratio of expected benefits and costs. Thus, the unemployment rate consists of a whole complex of decisions that are made both by those who offer their labor and by those who demand it. Obviously, they all take into account the expected benefits and possible costs as a result of making their own decisions. Different rates of unemployment among different groups of the population reflect not only differences in the demand for people's services, but also variations in the costs that different people face in finding, starting, or maintaining a job. A real understanding of the social mechanisms for including various categories of the population in the labor market allows government bodies to balance passive and active social policy measures in relation to different social groups in the conditions of emerging market relations.

There is no strict classification in sociological science various types economic behavior. This is explained by the variety of theoretical macro- and micro-approaches in the analysis of various phenomena and levels of economic life of society, their multidimensionality and structural complexity; the presence of many theoretical approaches within the framework of certain sociological and economic concepts.

Economic sociology seeks to apply sociological theory and sociological research to a set of phenomena related to the production, distribution, exchange and consumption of economic goods and services. In this way, a simple framework can be drawn up for the sociological analysis of economic behavior.

The following main types of economic behavior can be distinguished, implemented in various phases of the reproduction cycle: distributive (distribution), production, exchange and consumer. (This diagram is very conditional, since these types of economic behavior do not appear in their pure form.)

In fact, distributive models are behavioral elements of the multifaceted institution of property, which demonstrate many options for access to economic resources and the right to control them. Distributive (distributive) behavior reflects in its main components the functional and normative requirements of the institution of property and those constitutionally enshrined legal regimes that set the principles and framework for its implementation. It ensures the connection of various subjects with economic resources, determines the norm and measure of appropriation of the useful properties of these resources, as well as the mechanisms and methods of their redistribution from one user to another.

In accordance with the measure of access to resources and the degree of control over obtaining benefits from their turnover, three main models of distributive behavior can be distinguished: economic, agency, and functional.

The economic model characterizes the economic behavior of entities that are the owners of certain economic resources.

The agency model of distributive behavior is implemented by various subjects of economic behavior, which, on behalf of the owners, provide legal, economic and organizational control over the actions of persons who have access to the object of someone else’s property in order to realize, first of all, the owner’s interest and, accordingly, the effective circulation of economic resources.

The functional model of distributive behavior is characteristic of entities that use and benefit, on a contractual or other basis, from the beneficial properties of economic resources owned by others.

Production behavior is associated, first of all, with the accumulation and concentration of material, technological, intellectual, organizational and other resources, their connection and combination in order to obtain benefits with fixed consumer properties and profit (income) from their circulation on the market. It should be noted that, first of all, economic values ​​are produced, which in one case may be associated with a material substrate, and in another - not associated with it.

Two important aspects need to be taken into account. The first aspect concerns the pooling of human resources and is manifested in the functioning of institutional mechanisms for their integration. This issue is considered by the sociology of organizations. The second aspect concerns the specifics of the professional actions of many people who are included for various reasons in the production process and implement many programs and models of labor behavior. This issue is considered by the sociology of labor, industrial sociology, etc.

It is possible to identify many chains and patterns of social exchange that arise in the system of human interaction, in which various exchange criteria, evaluation methods and measures are used to determine the value, fairness, equivalence and guarantee of the distribution of goods. There are a variety of measures of social exchange. Some of them (for example, money) are universal and applicable in assessing many situations and actions, others act only in certain group, sociocultural and personal contexts.

Economic exchange is one of the forms of social exchange implemented in the sphere of economic life. Its basis is the interaction of people (economic entities) redistributing various economic resources in the structure of market relations in order to obtain benefits (profit, income, remuneration).

The traditional scheme of economic exchange “production - consumption” is clearly insufficient to explain the movement of economic resources from producers to consumers. The process of supplying produced goods is possible only if it is beneficial to those who produce and sell. It is the profitability of human activity, according to F. Hayek, that encourages many to choose an occupation in which their efforts are more productive and pay off accordingly.

Consumer behavior ensures the extraction of economic benefits from commodity circulation and the appropriation of their useful properties in order to satisfy numerous human needs.

We mean a narrower understanding of consumption and the corresponding type of economic activity, which are associated with the process of life support for households (families and individuals). The “appropriation” of the useful properties of economic resources in the production system is traditionally described in sociology in terms of labor behavior.

Within consumer behavior, a number of phases can be distinguished that reflect its characteristics:

b the consumption phase itself, within which the consumption properties of various resources at the disposal of households are withdrawn;

b purchasing behavior, a relatively independent element of consumer behavior associated with the acquisition of various goods and their substitutes included in economic turnover;

b information-search behavior focused on satisfying the effective demand of consumer cells (search for goods);

b information-seeking behavior associated with ensuring and maintaining a certain level of well-being (income) of consumer cells (search for income);

b economic behavior that ensures the coordination of all consumer actions in accordance with the tasks and target functions of households, as well as the implementation of the functions of their legal and social protection;

b distributive behavior associated with the endowment of members

b consumer cell with various resources owned by it;

ь functional behavior associated with the operation of basic and auxiliary means of life support for households;

b savings behavior aimed at reserving liquid funds and other assets owned by the consumer.

Speaking about the specifics of “consumer behavior,” we can identify a number of factors that significantly change the structure (proportions) of consumption towards the dominance of certain consumer preferences. They demonstrate objective features of the functioning of households and determine the specific balance of their consumption depending on:

* lifestyle;

* the stage of development they are at;

* demographic characteristics, number of family members;

* dominant social standards, reflecting their socio-cultural specificity, etc.

Naturally, the structure of consumer behavior is inseparable from specific sociocultural matrices that determine the dominants and priorities of consumer behavior, their functional and ritual-symbolic characteristics. Consumption is more a fact of social habits, traditions and stereotypes than of purely rational actions.

It is possible to formulate general principles and methods for implementing rational models of consumer behavior, which are based on maintaining a balance of income (budget restrictions) and necessary expenses (consumption).

Rational models of consumer behavior can be recognized as those that:

Ш do not go beyond the boundaries of real income;

Ш contribute to the creation of an optimal balance of expenses and income in accordance with the existing and rationally dosed consumption structure;

Ш ensure control and rationing of consumption patterns and corresponding expenses that do not exceed real income limits;

Ш establish a balance between income and expenditure items of consumer budgets;

Ш contribute to reserving part of the funds for the purpose of insurance against unforeseen situations and circumstances;

Ш provide an optimal balance of satisfying needs in accordance with existing standards of living and crediting the consumer budget at the expense of future income.

The rationality of consumer behavior models is also determined by the fact that they must ensure the protection and reproduction of a certain system of values, on the basis of which specific consumer cells operate. We are talking about a system of traditions and patterns of behavior that represent the social matrix of households, making it a specific and relatively independent cultural unit.

Having understood the essence of economic behavior and its types through the prism of sociological knowledge, it is necessary to find out what constitutes socio-economic behavior.

Economic behavior is behavior associated with the selection of economic alternatives for the purpose of rational choice, i.e. choice that minimizes costs and maximizes net benefits. The prerequisites for economic behavior are economic consciousness, economic thinking, economic interests, and social stereotypes.

Considering the category “economic behavior”, we set the task of its sociological interpretation, i.e., while preserving the principles of economic analysis, fill this category (as far as possible) with content close to real human behavior with all the contradictions, problems and “irrational residues” which are characteristic of him.

It can be stated that economic behavior is the “social substance” of all processes that together constitute what is called the economic life of society.

Thus, economic behavior is a system of social actions, which, firstly, are associated with the use of economic values ​​(resources) of different functions and purposes, and, secondly, are focused on obtaining benefits (benefits, rewards, profits) from their appeal.

N. Kondratiev gives a general interpretation and characteristics of social actions in the system of economic life of society and those subjects (business entities) who implement them. All business entities:

§ distinguish between valuable and non-valuable things;

§ whatever views they hold and whatever goals they strive for, as a rule, they defend personal economic interests or defend as their own the interests that they represent;

§ more or less subjectively evaluate the goods that they encounter, but their subjective assessments are always associated with the objectively existing valuation of these goods in society and which is expressed in prices;

§ are able, to a greater or lesser extent, to calculate, make calculations and therefore see where probable benefits await them and where losses await them;

§ they want, depending on individual conditions and abilities, to act in order to obtain greater benefits and prevent losses;

§ are actually capable of making mistakes in their calculations, and, consequently, in their actions.

Economic behavior as a social phenomenon is the subject of study of both economic science and sociology.

Sociology, going beyond the strictly defined categories of economic theory, focuses its attention on factors, conditions, social institutions, situations, as well as on various social actors operating in their context that realize their specific, including economic, interests. In other words, the sociologist's focus is on models of social behavior in connection with the application and explanation of the principle of maximizing results and minimizing costs, as well as those sociocultural institutions and accompanying social stimulants or constraints that make possible or significantly limit the rational use of various economic resources (personal, technological, organizational, financial, information, etc.).

The basis of social behavior economic type constitutes a diverse system of norms and rules that reflect the functional and other characteristics of various market elements. These norms and rules are mandatory for all legally operating subjects of economic behavior and are legally enshrined at the state level, in various agreements between people, in the traditions and norms of everyday life, as well as in the functional program of economic resources (for example, rules and regulations for handling money, purchase and sale, investment, lending, property, circulation of securities, rent, etc.).

To summarize, we can emphasize the following. The problem of socio-economic behavior is the subject of study of economic sociology. At the same time, it is not enough to simply take basic economic categories and fill them with some non-economic content. Economic sociology should be represented as a process of expanding a system of sociological concepts into the plane of economic relations.

The tradition of sociological analysis of the economic processes of society is based on a behavioral approach, the focus of which is the category “economic behavior” (M. Weber, V. Pareto, G. Simmel). N. Kondratiev managed to extrapolate the behavioral approach to a wide area of ​​economic phenomena. The main idea of ​​his concept is to highlight in the structure of economic processes that social substratum, which is the area of ​​study of sociologists. These are individual, group and mass acts of human behavior and their interactions that give rise to such a relatively independent area as the economy.

The most well-known are two models of economic behavior of individuals containing mechanisms of social coordination. A. Smith's model is based on the recognition of the compensatory role of wages as the basis of the economic behavior of the subject; There are two basic types of economic behavior of individuals: pre-market and market.

P. Heine's model substantiates the need for a certain balance of actual or imaginary benefits and costs on which the rational choice of an individual is based, which should bring him the greatest net benefit.

Within the framework of the concept of economic behavior, it is possible to explain social phenomena, including changes in the unemployment rate, as a consequence of the changing ratio of expected benefits and costs.

Economic sociology seeks to apply sociological theory and sociological research to a set of phenomena related to the production, distribution, exchange and consumption of economic goods and services.

The following main types of economic behavior are distinguished: Distributive (distributive) reflects in its main components the functional and normative requirements of the institution of property and those constitutionally enshrined legal regimes that set the principles and framework for its implementation. Within this model, three more models of economic behavior are distinguished: the economic model, the agency model and the functional model.

Production behavior is associated with the accumulation, concentration of various resources, their connection and combination in order to obtain goods with fixed consumer properties and profit (income) from their circulation on the market.

Exchange behavior ensures the movement of various economic goods (goods, services, information) on the market based on accounting and comparison of their values.

Consumer behavior ensures the extraction of economic benefits from commodity circulation and the appropriation of their useful properties in order to satisfy numerous human needs. Consumer behavior is realized in certain phases and is a fact of social habits, traditions and stereotypes rather than purely rational actions.

Economic behavior is the “social substance” of all processes that together constitute what is called the economic life of society.

Socio-economic behavior is a system of social actions that, firstly, are associated with the use of economic values ​​(resources) of different functions and purposes, and, secondly, are focused on obtaining benefits (benefits, rewards, profits) from their appeals. It is based on a system of norms and rules that reflect the functional and other characteristics of various market elements.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

Economic behavior and economic consciousness, etc.subject of sociological studies

Patlasova Elena

Plan

1. Correlation between the concepts of economic consciousness and economic behavior

2. Typology of economic behavior

Literature

1. The relationship between the concepts of economic behavior andeconomic consciousness

It is known that the basis of the circulation of economic values ​​(goods, services, information) are numerous, different in nature and content, cyclically renewed individual, group and mass acts of human behavior.

Economic behavior is a system of social actions that, firstly, are associated with the use of economic values ​​(resources) of different functions and purposes, and, secondly, are focused on making a profit (reward) from their circulation.

Economic behavior as a social phenomenon is the subject of study in economics and sociology. In the first case, attention is focused on which of the rare productive resources people and society, with or without the help of money, select for the production of goods and distribution for consumption. Economic science analyzes production, methods of organizing resources, and distribution of wealth, explaining the influence of "pure" economic variables on each other. Sociology studies conditions, situations, sociocultural institutions and social actors that realize their interests, including economic ones. economic consciousness behavior social

The sociologist's focus is on models of social behavior associated with the application and interpretation of the principle of maximizing results and minimizing costs, as well as those institutions that make possible or significantly limit the rational use of economic resources.

Each person, regardless of status, is constantly (directly or indirectly) involved in different sectors of the economic and productive life of society and is a participant in the transformation of economic values. He creates them, consumes them, exchanges them, appropriates them.

Carrying out economic actions, a person consciously or unconsciously determines his participation in the economic life of society and, with varying degrees of success, calculates his costs and benefits. In a strict sense, economic behavior refers to those social actions whose structure and content include simple and complex elements of economic life (N. Kondratiev). The latter have a value, natural and combined (value and natural) expression. Simple and complex elements of economic life are included in the system of market connections and relationships through specific actions of people who bring market elements into an active state, pursuing their own interests, often opposing in motives and content.

The basis of social behavior of the economic type is a system of norms and rules that reflect the functional and other characteristics of various market elements. They are mandatory for all legally operating subjects of economic behavior. These norms and rules are legally enshrined at the state level, in agreements between people, in the traditions and stereotypes of everyday life, as well as in the functional program of the market elements themselves.

Subjects implementing various models of economic behavior are prescribed functionally and normatively only the initial (necessary and acceptable for given market conditions) framework and restrictions. Within these limits, they can build, depending on their goals, intentions, abilities, experience and competence, various combinations of market elements and related decisions and actions. The number of combinations is enormous; it all depends on the calculation of available resources, as well as the ability to foresee the consequences of planned actions.

The assertion that economic sociology pursues the application of sociological theory and sociological research to a complex of phenomena related to the production, distribution, exchange and consumption of economic goods and services serves as a general prerequisite for theoretical considerations on the issue of interest to us. Nevertheless, it can be accepted as the simplest scheme for differentiation and sociological analysis of economic behavior. Based on these premises, we will highlight the main types of economic behavior implemented in different phases of the reproduction cycle: production, exchange, distribution and consumption. Of course, this scheme is very conditional, since the named types of economic behavior do not appear in their pure form. As a rule, certain subjects included in the reproduction cycle are multifunctional: they simultaneously participate in the production of economic values, exchange them, accumulate, consume, etc. In addition to the main one, they implement many models and specialized programs of economic behavior, exchanging resources and information with the market environment, combining them in accordance with their target functions, budgetary constraints and competence.

Each participant in economic behavior (firm, consumer unit, joint stock company, farm, etc.) strives to ensure the autonomy of its existence based on the search for an optimal scheme of interaction with the market environment. Let us note that we understand autonomy as a natural attitude towards freedom of choice when searching for the optimal combination of available resources in order to maximize the benefits from their circulation.

However, in conditions of market uncertainty, the actions of subjects cannot be constantly reproduced on the basis of rational choice. A positive balance of expenses and income is not always achieved.

Any economically feasible action is associated with the risk of the manufacturer, investor, buyer, seller, owner, etc. Even in standard situations, a negative result is possible. This is explained by the subjective limitations of decision makers (for example, their incompetence); lack of complete reliable information about the parameters of the market environment, the actions of partners and competitors; dysfunctional behavior within an organization (firm, enterprise).

It is obvious that the structure and specialization of subjects of economic behavior, even those operating in one phase of the reproduction cycle, vary over a huge range. This is due to the fact that the parameters of economic behavior differ significantly depending on: the nature of the economic resources put into market circulation; ways to benefit from their circulation; the degree and risk factors that influence the achievement of a positive result; duration of the cost-reimbursement cycle; accuracy of calculations (calculation) of the expected and planned result; methods of income distribution, etc.

2. Typeology of economic behavior

Along with the main types of economic behavior, the following models and varieties can be distinguished: monetary, economic, redistributive, purchasing, sales, commercial, marketing, intermediary, opportunistic gaming, entrepreneurial, speculative, non-normative, etc. Here brief characteristics the most important types of economic behavior and some of their modifications.

Production behavior is associated primarily with the accumulation and concentration of material, technological, intellectual, organizational and other resources, their combination to obtain benefits with fixed consumer properties and profit (income) from circulation on the market. This very simplified interpretation, of course, does not reveal the entire complex of factors characterizing the behavior of subjects acting as commodity producers. The most significant is that production behavior is primarily “behavior based on the search and maintenance of such input-output combinations that maximize the difference between income and costs.”

Thus, in a market economy, decisions, motivations and actions of producers are aimed at finding optimal combinations of cost and non-cost labor factors. This allows you to increase profits in a given specific period of time, if the value and supply-demand ratio for the products are determined.

A fairly rigorous reconstruction of rational models of production behavior, presented in microeconomics, is “a direct translation into a clear mathematical language of the problems of choosing an optimal solution.” However, it does not explain many factors that determine the actual behavior of economic entities in a stochastic and multidimensional sociocultural space. Their actions are not always and not necessarily based on a rational choice of optimal solutions. There are limitations of an objective and subjective order: social stereotypes and traditions, extreme situations, personal and sociocultural factors, etc., which deform rational schemes and models of economic behavior, turning them into an unattainable ideal. Obviously, sociological analysis of production behavior is much broader than rational schemes and reconstructions of microeconomics, which (in verbal form or using mathematical apparatus) offer different models of maximization.

Exchange behavior ensures the movement of economic goods, services, information through market channels based on accounting and comparison of their value. The measure of the relative rarity of circulating goods is fixed in prices and established in the process of mutual adaptation on the market (F. Hayek). It controls the actions of entities acting in relation to each other as sellers and buyers.

It should be noted that the turnover of economic values ​​is not only and not so much physical process, unfolding in time and space, as much as the movement of scattered, heterogeneous information, “crystallizing” in prices and helping to make decisions. Benefits (goods) focused on specific needs are produced and circulated primarily when it is beneficial to both the seller and the buyer. The intensity of the movement of economic values, in a certain sense, is directly proportional to the mutual benefit from their circulation.

We can identify the most typical models and their modifications, which characterize the functional specificity and multidimensionality of behavioral programs implemented in the exchange of economic values.

Commercial Conduct associated with the movement and supply of various goods based on the search for information about their relative value and the use of this information to obtain certain benefits from their turnover. An expanded version of classic commercial behavior is marketing. The function of the latter is to create conditions and situations that influence the positive motivation of consumers and buyers, the formation of a favorable infrastructure and sales environment.

Within exchange behavior there are many relatively independent models of purchasing and sales behavior, models of supply and demand of economic resources (for example, labor), etc. We can consider models of supply and demand of personal resources, models of consumer and producer behavior (including search, coordination, discrimination, queuing, etc.), direct contract models based on the mutual benefit of different agents of the market process, etc.

Monetary behavior ensures the exchange of goods between entities based on the use of liquid funds through a comparative assessment of the rarity of these goods and redistribution of benefits. Monetary behavior is a kind of “lubricant” of market processes, which helps to minimize transaction and other costs associated with the functioning of the exchange. Sociological analysis allows us to rationalize the motivational and sociocultural matrices of monetary behavior at the individual, group and mass levels. Based on the study of the functions of symbolic vehicles of social exchange and interaction, one of which is money, this helps to understand the mechanisms of value communication between people.

Mediation behavior- a special type of communicative actions associated with the exchange of price and other information between at least three agents of the market process (for example, a seller, a buyer and a third party who connects their economic interests, pursuing their own benefit). The effective implementation of certain economic tasks is based on searching, receiving, storing and transmitting confidential information. The latter is distributed unevenly and is a very rare good. Naturally, we are talking about market information, which is valuable only at a certain time and in a certain place.

Distributive(distribution) behavior ensures the connection of market subjects with economic resources, determines the norm and measure of appropriation of useful properties and benefits from their circulation. The market in this sense can be considered as an endless process of redistribution of a huge mass of economic resources through a network of exchange and circulation, where many subjects permanently acquire and lose the right to control certain goods.

The specificity, functional and motivational features of distribution models depend on the measure of access to resources and, accordingly, the degree of control over obtaining benefits from their circulation. Three main modifications can be distinguished: economic (sovereign-distributive), functional-distributive and commission-distributive.

First model(economic) characterizes the social behavior of subjects who have an absolute or preferential right to receive benefits from the use of resources that they own.

Second model(functional-distributive) is inherent in entities that use and benefit, on a contractual or other basis, from the beneficial properties of economic resources owned by others. A typical example of this type of economic behavior is demonstrated by individuals hired by an employer.

Third model(commission-distributive) is implemented by entities that, on behalf of the owners, provide administrative, legal and other control over

actions of persons who have direct or indirect access to the property of others.

The listed models do not reveal the full diversity of social behavior of economic entities in the distribution cycle system. In fact, under developed market conditions, there are a lot of social invariants that reflect “changeable and very complex “bundles of powers”, the most effective combinations of which have not yet been found for all spheres.”

Consumer behavior is aimed at extracting economic benefits from commodity circulation and appropriating their beneficial properties in order to satisfy numerous needs. The consumption phase is typical for most entities that use certain resources for their own needs. This is a complex functional relationship of many factors that determine the dynamics and structure of the inclusion and exclusion of economic resources from commodity circulation in accordance with the ability (or inability) of economic entities to find an optimal balance with the market environment. They implement a range of functions and behavioral programs that allow them to perform these actions with varying degrees of success. This process correlated with income level, consumption standards and a measure of competence (ability) to calculate one’s costs and benefits.

In the consumer cycle system, there are several interconnected levels, each of which has relative independence and specific functional specifics. For example, purchasing behavior associated with the search and acquisition of specific goods (goods) or their substitutes that satisfy immediate, short-term, medium-term and long-term needs; behavior aimed at searching for appropriate income that provides the required standard and quality of life.

It is also possible to analyze relatively autonomous models of consumer behavior associated with monitoring the rational use of consumer goods included in the permanent or variable property fund of an economic unit (family). Of interest are “balance” models of behavior that help preserve and maintain the balance of economic entities with the external economic environment. It should be noted that some models of distribution and consumer behavior complement each other.

A brief description of the main models of economic behavior can be expanded.

The most important aspect is the identification of a social substrate in the structure of economic processes implemented throughout the “perimeter” of the reproduction cycle, which is the area of ​​study of sociologists. This theoretical procedure was consistently implemented by N.D. Kondratiev, The conceptual approach he applied made it possible to establish and highlight the non-economic components of the economic processes themselves. First of all, these are individual, group and mass acts of human behavior and their interactions, which give rise to such a relatively independent area social life like the economy. Obviously, not all social actions implemented at different structural levels organizations of society are substratum in relation to economic processes and institutions.

According to Kondratiev, these are only (or predominantly) those actions and behavioral acts that realize economic interest or are indirectly transformed into such. Economic processes and institutions are based on social actions of a specific nature. These are acts of behavior (a chain of acts) implemented in the process of satisfying human needs or aimed at creating conditions and means for their satisfaction. The structure and content of social behavior of this type are extremely diverse. It can proceed according to different motivation schemes, including utilitarian, hedonistic, emotional, traditional, normative-imperative, etc.

Many economists of different schools and directions have explanatory and descriptive schemes for models of economic behavior. However, for the most part they are fragmentary, discrete and used to construct and illustrate individual hypotheses and concepts. A striking example is the motives of monetary behavior of J.M. Keynes, which underlie his theory of demand for money.

In our opinion, N.D. Kondratiev is one of the few who paid special attention not to individual components of economic behavior, but developed a holistic sociological concept. It has not lost its relevance and can serve as a reliable means of rational reconstruction of various models that are implemented in all phases of the reproduction cycle. For example, with its help it is possible to carry out a sociological inversion of micro- and macroeconomic models of economic theory, described in verbalized or mathematical form.

An important aspect of the sociological analysis of economic processes is the study of the mutual determination of the substrate behavioral layer, various components and structures of the economic life of society. The extent and intensity of these social interactions, their vector and tension can be assessed by studying the axiological matrix of economic behavior. The latter gives an idea of ​​its sociocultural components, which unite subjects of social action and economic elements into a single complex, and in different combinations and combinations.

Thus, the study of economic culture as the most important determinant of social behavior is the central problem of economic sociology.

Economic culture is a stable system of normative standards, behavioral patterns, cultural standards, traditions, social habits and skills that reproduce the dominant ways and methods of control over economic resources. The so-called sociocultural matrix of economic behavior, formed in certain specific historical conditions, is preserved in the stereotypes of mass consciousness. The latter acquire a relatively autonomous existence and begin to have a reverse impact on the functioning of economic institutions. This problem is currently attracting close attention from sociologists.

The subject area of ​​economic sociology should include studies of the subjective side of social actions unfolding in the structure of economic processes. The analysis of subjects of economic behavior, their motivations, preferences, abilities and interests is very relevant. Of particular importance is the sociological interpretation of such concepts and categories as firm, manufacturer, partnership, partnership, joint stock company, household, etc. These concepts reflect the functional and stratification characteristics of real subjects (individuals, groups, organizations, families, etc.) that are included in the economic life of society.

In conclusion, let us name another important problem of sociological analysis - the study and measurement of the economic stratification of society, which is associated with the functioning of the institution of property and its modifications. Models of social behavior, reflecting the degree of exclusivity of access to benefits, types of legal regimes and different combinations of elements of property rights, determine the effectiveness of the inclusion of subjects in economic structure society, the limits of social reproduction, the degree and vector of freedom of their social behavior.

V.V. Radaev three main approaches that defined the cutting edge of economic sociology in the late 90s - the sociology of rational choice, the network approach, and new institutionalism. French economic sociology was singled out as a separate direction. In our country during Soviet times, sociological research in the field of economics was quite popular, although it was carried out within the framework of Marxist sociology of labor. According to V.V. Radaev, economic sociology in Russia is “doomed to success,” and the most promising direction is culturally oriented new institutionalism.

The institutional-sociological approach, according to R.V. Chernyaeva (Shakhty), is effective in analyzing social costs in the economy. The category of "costs" is usually considered as purely economic. But from the perspective of new institutionalism, in the modern economic system costs prevail, the economic mechanism for minimizing them is based on trust and social interaction. As for the methodology for calculating social costs, today there is an obvious need to develop new indicators that would allow us to characterize people’s satisfaction not only with material, but also with intangible conditions of existence.

E.V. Kapustkina (St. Petersburg) examines the elements of conscious and unconscious in economic behavior. The term "unconscious" is used to characterize individual and group behavior, the true goals and consequences of which are not realized. Moreover, the lack of awareness of economic behavior does not necessarily mean that it is irrational. Thus, actions brought to the point of automation are certainly rational, since they contribute to achieving the goal with minimal energy costs. The report identified elements of the unconscious at all stages of the economic cycle (production, distribution, exchange and consumption). The proportion of unconscious actions at each of these stages is different. R.V. Karapetyan (St. Petersburg) devoted his report to the analysis of the social evolution of labor consciousness. In parallel with the development of human consciousness, his awareness of his activities also developed. At a certain stage in the development of tools of labor, conditions are formed under which, in the minds of people, their dependence on the forces of nature is replaced by social dependence. An image of work as a dependent activity is formed. Over time, freedom of choice decreases (through division of labor, professionalization), and social dependence steadily increases. The social environment forms in the mind an understanding of the need to work, since a person outside of work is a person outside of society.

Yu.A. Sventsitskaya (St. Petersburg), based on the study of texts of conspiracies concerning money relations, showed the presence of magical practices as elements of primitive consciousness in modern economic life. She was supported by G.P. Zibrova (St. Petersburg), from the point of view of which the human phenomenon has not yet been studied, the influence of one person on another can be very significant, which allows us today to use the practical experience of the spiritual life of our ancestors. According to V.V. Skitovich (St. Petersburg), stable forms of behavior, incl. economic, are reflected in folklore, in particular in proverbs. The section also presented new areas of research within the framework of economic sociology - the sociology of financial behavior (O.E. Kuzina, Moscow), the sociology of property (E.E. Tarando, St. Petersburg). At the Department of Economic Sociology of St. Petersburg state university Research is also being conducted within the framework of the sociology of distribution, sociology of exchange, and sociology of consumption. The latter also includes sociological analysis of brands based on poststructuralism. The differences between a product and a brand were analyzed in the speech of A. Deichsel (Hamburg, Germany). N.I. Boenko (St. Petersburg) proposed to supplement the currently prevailing civilizational approach to the analysis of the evolution of the economic sphere using a new, synergetic-organizational approach.

It is well known that labor sociology was one of the most, if not the most, developed branches of Soviet sociology. Within its framework, vast experience has been accumulated in empirical research, the object of which was labor consciousness and labor behavior, which can be considered as one of the forms of economic consciousness and economic behavior. Therefore, the organizers of the Congress seemed quite justified in the opportunity to consider the stated topic from both positions - economic sociology and sociology of labor. This was partly possible, and partly not. According to some representatives of the sociology of labor, economic sociology is a science divorced from life, therefore there are and cannot be any points of contact between the two directions. This division seems to us far-fetched. So, for example, the object of research in the sociology of labor in the last decade has become not only the directly productive labor of workers and managerial work on industrial enterprises, but also entrepreneurial activity. Meanwhile, the analysis of entrepreneurship traditionally belongs to the field of sociology of entrepreneurship, one of components economic sociology. Another problem that caused a lively discussion at the section was the question of the method of economic sociology. Two main approaches have clearly emerged. The first, interdisciplinary, is adhered to by Yu.V. Veselov. In his opinion, there is an urgent need to create a new social mega-science that would combine the capabilities of all the humanities. This is the only way to make progress in the analysis of all spheres of social life, including economics. As proof of this thesis, he referred to the speech of H. Schrader (Magdeburg, Germany), who, at the intersection of economic sociology and economic anthropology, conducted a study of St. Petersburg pawnshops as one of the survival strategies of the city's population. This approach was generally supported by E.L. Pinteleyeva (Tver). She believes that it is necessary to develop a new method for analyzing economic actions, combining at least the methods of economic sociology and economic psychology.

Literature

1. Kondratyev N.D. Basic problems of economic statics and dynamics. M.: Nauka, 1991. pp. 104-111.

2. Samuelson P. Economics. T. 17 M.: VNIISI, 1992. P. 7.

3. Smelser N.J. Sociology of economic life//American sociology. M.: Progress, 1972. P. 188-189.

4. Leontyev V. Economic essays. M.: Politizdat, 1990. P. 49.

5. Hayek F. Pernicious arrogance. M: News, 1992. P. 173.

6. Verkhovin V.I. Structure and functions of monetary behavior // Sociol. research 1993. No. 10. P. 67--73.

7. Sorokin P. System of sociology. T. 1. Syktyvkar: Komi book. publishing house, 1991. pp. 126-127.

8. Zaslavskaya T.I., Ryvkina R.V. Sociology of economic life. Novosibirsk: Nauka, 1991. pp. 196-227.

9. V.I. Verkhovin Economic behavior as a subject of sociological analysis // Sociological Research 2004 No. 5

Posted on Allbest.ru

...

Similar documents

Familiarization with the basics of social behavior of subjects regarding the consumption and distribution of economic resources in the market exchange system. Consideration of models and types of economic behavior. Studying the parameters of economic behavior.

abstract, added 12/13/2014


Consideration of the concept of “youth”. Determining the essence of “attitude towards money” in the structure of social behavior of young people. Revealing the place of financial values ​​in the structure of economic behavior of young people. Influence on financial behavior of young people.

thesis, added 08/20/2017


The concept of determining the line of economic behavior of an individual. Classification of factors influencing a person’s consciousness and his reaction to information about goods and services. Psychological analysis of consumer behavior: social, physical and mathematical aspects.

course work, added 10/18/2014


The problem of socio-economic behavior in sociological knowledge. Features of the Russian mentality. Youth as a social group, analysis of its socio-economic behavior. Secondary data analysis as a method of sociological research.

thesis, added 10/13/2013


The concept and essence of social behavior. Comparative characteristics of antisocial and illegal behavior. The main causes and forms of deviant or deviant behavior. Means, types, methods and principles of social control over deviation.

abstract, added 11/14/2010


Economic labor behavior of people, socio-economic stratification of society. Deterioration of the financial situation of the economically active population of Ukraine. The choice of life economic strategies for different categories of the working population.

test, added 01/16/2012


The concept, varieties, structure and elements of social behavior of an individual in modern society. External and internal factors of behavior regulation, dialectics and mechanisms of this process. Self-regulation of social behavior of the individual, its methods.

course work, added 01/25/2011


Concept and classification of social networks. Models of influence: network autocorrelation, imitative behavior, social influence, correlation, diffusion of innovation. The importance of social connections in shaping the opinions and behavior of agents in Internet networks.

course work, added 12/24/2017


History of suicide and the study of suicidal behavior in Russia. Controversies related to euthanasia. Features of suicide as a social phenomenon. The most common classifications of suicide. Causes of suicidal behavior. Ways to prevent suicide.

course work, added 04/26/2011


The concept of deviant behavior, its role in current society. The essence of the main theories explaining this behavior of people. Features of the causes of deviant behavior of modern youth. Specifics of types and forms of deviant behavior, their goals and objectives.

2. Typology of economic behavior

Along with the main types of economic behavior, the following models and varieties can be distinguished: monetary, economic, redistributive, purchasing, sales, commercial, marketing, intermediary, opportunistic gaming, entrepreneurial, speculative, non-normative, etc. Here are brief characteristics of the most important types of economic behavior and some their modifications.

Production behavior is associated primarily with the accumulation and concentration of material, technological, intellectual, organizational and other resources, their combination to obtain benefits with fixed consumer properties and profit (income) from circulation on the market. This very simplified interpretation, of course, does not reveal the entire complex of factors characterizing the behavior of subjects acting as commodity producers. The most significant is that production behavior is primarily “behavior based on the search and maintenance of such input-output combinations that maximize the difference between income and costs.”

Thus, in a market economy, decisions, motivations and actions of producers are aimed at finding optimal combinations of cost and non-cost labor factors. This allows you to increase profits in a given specific period of time, if the value and supply-demand ratio for the products are determined.

A fairly rigorous reconstruction of rational models of production behavior, presented in microeconomics, is “a direct translation into a clear mathematical language of the problems of choosing an optimal solution.” However, it does not explain many factors that determine the actual behavior of economic entities in a stochastic and multidimensional sociocultural space. Their actions are not always and not necessarily based on a rational choice of optimal solutions. There are limitations of an objective and subjective order: social stereotypes and traditions, extreme situations, personal and sociocultural factors, etc., which deform rational schemes and models of economic behavior, turning them into an unattainable ideal. Obviously, sociological analysis of production behavior is much broader than rational schemes and reconstructions of microeconomics, which (in verbal form or using mathematical apparatus) offer different models of maximization.

Exchange behavior ensures the movement of economic goods, services, information through market channels based on accounting and comparison of their value. The measure of the relative rarity of circulating goods is fixed in prices and established in the process of mutual adaptation on the market (F. Hayek). It controls the actions of entities acting in relation to each other as sellers and buyers.

It should be noted that the turnover of economic values ​​is not only and not so much a physical process unfolding in time and space, but rather the movement of scattered, heterogeneous information that “crystallizes” in prices and helps make decisions. Benefits (goods) focused on specific needs are produced and circulated primarily when it is beneficial to both the seller and the buyer. The intensity of the movement of economic values, in a certain sense, is directly proportional to the mutual benefit from their circulation.

We can identify the most typical models and their modifications, which characterize the functional specificity and multidimensionality of behavioral programs implemented in the exchange of economic values.

Commercial Conduct associated with the movement and supply of various goods based on the search for information about their relative value and the use of this information to obtain certain benefits from their turnover. An expanded version of classic commercial behavior is marketing. The function of the latter is to create conditions and situations that influence the positive motivation of consumers and buyers, the formation of a favorable infrastructure and sales environment.

Within exchange behavior there are many relatively independent models of purchasing and sales behavior, models of supply and demand of economic resources (for example, labor), etc. We can consider models of supply and demand of personal resources, models of consumer and producer behavior (including search, coordination, discrimination, queuing, etc.), direct contract models based on the mutual benefit of different agents of the market process, etc.

Monetary behavior ensures the exchange of goods between entities based on the use of liquid funds through a comparative assessment of the rarity of these goods and redistribution of benefits. Monetary behavior is a kind of “lubricant” of market processes, which helps to minimize transaction and other costs associated with the functioning of the exchange. Sociological analysis allows us to rationalize the motivational and sociocultural matrices of monetary behavior at the individual, group and mass levels. Based on the study of the functions of symbolic vehicles of social exchange and interaction, one of which is money, this helps to understand the mechanisms of value communication between people.

Mediation behavior- a special type of communicative actions associated with the exchange of price and other information between at least three agents of the market process (for example, a seller, a buyer and a third party who connects their economic interests, pursuing their own benefit). The effective implementation of certain economic tasks is based on searching, receiving, storing and transmitting confidential information. The latter is distributed unevenly and is a very rare good. Naturally, we are talking about market information, which is valuable only at a certain time and in a certain place.

Distributive(distribution) behavior ensures the connection of market subjects with economic resources, determines the norm and measure of appropriation of useful properties and benefits from their circulation. The market in this sense can be considered as an endless process of redistribution of a huge mass of economic resources through a network of exchange and circulation, where many subjects permanently acquire and lose the right to control certain goods.

The specificity, functional and motivational features of distribution models depend on the measure of access to resources and, accordingly, the degree of control over obtaining benefits from their circulation. Three main modifications can be distinguished: economic (sovereign-distributive), functional-distributive and commission-distributive.

First model(economic) characterizes the social behavior of subjects who have an absolute or preferential right to receive benefits from the use of resources that they own.

Second model(functional-distributive) is inherent in entities that use and benefit, on a contractual or other basis, from the beneficial properties of economic resources owned by others. A typical example of this type of economic behavior is demonstrated by individuals hired by an employer.

Third model(commission-distributive) is implemented by entities that, on behalf of the owners, provide administrative, legal and other control over

actions of persons who have direct or indirect access to the property of others.

The listed models do not reveal the full diversity of social behavior of economic entities in the distribution cycle system. In fact, under developed market conditions, there are a lot of social invariants that reflect “changeable and very complex “bundles of powers”, the most effective combinations of which have not yet been found for all spheres.”

Consumer behavior is aimed at extracting economic benefits from commodity circulation and appropriating their beneficial properties in order to satisfy numerous needs. The consumption phase is typical for most entities that use certain resources for their own needs. This is a complex functional relationship of many factors that determine the dynamics and structure of the inclusion and exclusion of economic resources from commodity circulation in accordance with the ability (or inability) of economic entities to find an optimal balance with the market environment. They implement a range of functions and behavioral programs that allow them to perform these actions with varying degrees of success. This process is correlated with income level, consumption standards and a measure of competence (ability) to calculate one’s costs and benefits.

In the consumer cycle system, there are several interconnected levels, each of which has relative independence and specific functional specifics. For example, purchasing behavior associated with the search and acquisition of specific goods (goods) or their substitutes that satisfy immediate, short-term, medium-term and long-term needs; behavior aimed at searching for appropriate income that provides the required standard and quality of life.

It is also possible to analyze relatively autonomous models of consumer behavior associated with monitoring the rational use of consumer goods included in the permanent or variable property fund of an economic unit (family). Of interest are “balance” models of behavior that help preserve and maintain the balance of economic entities with the external economic environment. It should be noted that some models of distribution and consumer behavior complement each other.

A brief description of the main models of economic behavior can be expanded.

The most important aspect is the identification of a social substrate in the structure of economic processes implemented throughout the “perimeter” of the reproduction cycle, which is the area of ​​study of sociologists. This theoretical procedure was consistently implemented by N.D. Kondratiev, The conceptual approach he applied made it possible to establish and highlight the non-economic components of the economic processes themselves. First of all, these are individual, group and mass acts of human behavior and their interactions, which give rise to such a relatively independent area of ​​social life as the economy. Obviously, not all social actions implemented at different structural levels of social organization are substratum in relation to economic processes and institutions.

According to Kondratiev, these are only (or predominantly) those actions and behavioral acts that realize economic interest or are indirectly transformed into such. Economic processes and institutions are based on social actions of a specific nature. These are acts of behavior (a chain of acts) implemented in the process of satisfying human needs or aimed at creating conditions and means for their satisfaction. The structure and content of social behavior of this type are extremely diverse. It can proceed according to different motivation schemes, including utilitarian, hedonistic, emotional, traditional, normative-imperative, etc.

Many economists of different schools and directions have explanatory and descriptive schemes for models of economic behavior. However, for the most part they are fragmentary, discrete and used to construct and illustrate individual hypotheses and concepts. A striking example is the motives of monetary behavior of J.M. Keynes, which underlie his theory of demand for money.

In our opinion, N.D. Kondratiev is one of the few who paid special attention not to individual components of economic behavior, but developed a holistic sociological concept. It has not lost its relevance and can serve as a reliable means of rational reconstruction of various models that are implemented in all phases of the reproduction cycle. For example, with its help it is possible to carry out a sociological inversion of micro- and macroeconomic models of economic theory, described in verbalized or mathematical form.

An important aspect of the sociological analysis of economic processes is the study of the mutual determination of the substrate behavioral layer, various components and structures of the economic life of society. The extent and intensity of these social interactions, their vector and tension can be assessed by studying the axiological matrix of economic behavior. The latter gives an idea of ​​its sociocultural components, which unite subjects of social action and economic elements into a single complex, and in different combinations and combinations.

Thus, the study of economic culture as the most important determinant of social behavior is the central problem of economic sociology.

Economic culture is a stable system of normative standards, behavioral patterns, cultural standards, traditions, social habits and skills that reproduce the dominant ways and methods of control over economic resources. The so-called sociocultural matrix of economic behavior, formed in certain specific historical conditions, is preserved in the stereotypes of mass consciousness. The latter acquire a relatively autonomous existence and begin to have a reverse impact on the functioning of economic institutions. This problem is currently attracting close attention from sociologists.

The subject area of ​​economic sociology should include studies of the subjective side of social actions unfolding in the structure of economic processes. The analysis of subjects of economic behavior, their motivations, preferences, abilities and interests is very relevant. Of particular importance is the sociological interpretation of such concepts and categories as firm, manufacturer, partnership, partnership, joint stock company, household, etc. These concepts reflect the functional and stratification characteristics of real subjects (individuals, groups, organizations, families, etc.) that are included in the economic life of society.

In conclusion, let us name another important problem of sociological analysis - the study and measurement of the economic stratification of society, which is associated with the functioning of the institution of property and its modifications. Models of social behavior, reflecting the degree of exclusivity of access to benefits, types of legal regimes and various combinations of elements of property rights, determine the effectiveness of the inclusion of subjects in the economic structure of society, the limits of social reproduction, the degree and vector of freedom of their social behavior.

V.V. Radaev three main approaches that defined the cutting edge of economic sociology in the late 90s - the sociology of rational choice, the network approach, and new institutionalism. French economic sociology was singled out as a separate direction. In our country during Soviet times, sociological research in the field of economics was quite popular, although it was carried out within the framework of Marxist sociology of labor. According to V.V. Radaev, economic sociology in Russia is “doomed to success,” and the most promising direction is culturally oriented new institutionalism.

The institutional-sociological approach, according to R.V. Chernyaeva (Shakhty), is effective in analyzing social costs in the economy. The category of "costs" is usually considered as purely economic. But from the perspective of new institutionalism, in the modern economic system costs prevail, the economic mechanism for minimizing them is based on trust and social interaction. As for the methodology for calculating social costs, today there is an obvious need to develop new indicators that would allow us to characterize people’s satisfaction not only with material, but also with intangible conditions of existence.

E.V. Kapustkina (St. Petersburg) examines the elements of conscious and unconscious in economic behavior. The term "unconscious" is used to characterize individual and group behavior, the true goals and consequences of which are not realized. Moreover, the lack of awareness of economic behavior does not necessarily mean that it is irrational. Thus, actions brought to the point of automation are certainly rational, since they contribute to achieving the goal with minimal energy costs. The report identified elements of the unconscious at all stages of the economic cycle (production, distribution, exchange and consumption). The proportion of unconscious actions at each of these stages is different. R.V. Karapetyan (St. Petersburg) devoted his report to the analysis of the social evolution of labor consciousness. In parallel with the development of human consciousness, his awareness of his activities also developed. At a certain stage in the development of tools of labor, conditions are formed under which, in the minds of people, their dependence on the forces of nature is replaced by social dependence. An image of work as a dependent activity is formed. Over time, freedom of choice decreases (through division of labor, professionalization), and social dependence steadily increases. The social environment forms in the mind an understanding of the need to work, since a person outside of work is a person outside of society.

Yu.A. Sventsitskaya (St. Petersburg), based on the study of texts of conspiracies concerning money relations, showed the presence of magical practices as elements of primitive consciousness in modern economic life. She was supported by G.P. Zibrova (St. Petersburg), from the point of view of which the human phenomenon has not yet been studied, the influence of one person on another can be very significant, which allows us today to use the practical experience of the spiritual life of our ancestors. According to V.V. Skitovich (St. Petersburg), stable forms of behavior, incl. economic, are reflected in folklore, in particular in proverbs. The section also presented new areas of research within the framework of economic sociology - the sociology of financial behavior (O.E. Kuzina, Moscow), the sociology of property (E.E. Tarando, St. Petersburg). The Department of Economic Sociology of St. Petersburg State University also conducts research within the sociology of distribution, sociology of exchange, and sociology of consumption. The latter also includes sociological analysis of brands based on poststructuralism. The differences between a product and a brand were analyzed in the speech of A. Deichsel (Hamburg, Germany). N.I. Boenko (St. Petersburg) proposed to supplement the currently prevailing civilizational approach to analyzing the evolution of the economic sphere with a new, synergetic-organizational approach.

It is well known that labor sociology was one of the most, if not the most, developed branches of Soviet sociology. Within its framework, vast experience has been accumulated in empirical research, the object of which was labor consciousness and labor behavior, which can be considered as one of the forms of economic consciousness and economic behavior. Therefore, the organizers of the Congress seemed quite justified in the opportunity to consider the stated topic from both positions - economic sociology and sociology of labor. This was partly possible, and partly not. According to some representatives of the sociology of labor, economic sociology is a science divorced from life, therefore there are and cannot be any points of contact between the two directions. This division seems to us far-fetched. For example, the object of research in the sociology of labor in the last decade has become not only the direct productive labor of workers and managerial labor at industrial enterprises, but also entrepreneurial activity. Meanwhile, the analysis of entrepreneurship traditionally belongs to the field of sociology of entrepreneurship, one of the components of economic sociology. Another problem that caused a lively discussion at the section was the question of the method of economic sociology. Two main approaches have clearly emerged. The first, interdisciplinary, is adhered to by Yu.V. Veselov. In his opinion, there is an urgent need to create a new social mega-science that would combine the capabilities of all the humanities. This is the only way to make progress in the analysis of all spheres of social life, including economics. As proof of this thesis, he referred to the speech of H. Schrader (Magdeburg, Germany), who, at the intersection of economic sociology and economic anthropology, conducted a study of St. Petersburg pawnshops as one of the survival strategies of the city's population. This approach was generally supported by E.L. Pinteleyeva (Tver). She believes that it is necessary to develop a new method for analyzing economic actions, combining at least the methods of economic sociology and economic psychology.

Literature

• 1. Kondratyev N.D. Basic problems of economic statics and dynamics. M.: Nauka, 1991. pp. 104-111.
• 2. Samuelson P. Economics. T. 17 M.: VNIISI, 1992. P. 7.
• 3. Smelser N.J. Sociology of economic life//American sociology. M.: Progress, 1972. P. 188-189.
• 4. Leontyev V. Economic essays. M.: Politizdat, 1990. P. 49.
• 5. Hayek F. Pernicious arrogance. M: News, 1992. P. 173.
• 6. Verkhovin V.I. Structure and functions of monetary behavior // Sociol. research 1993. No. 10. P. 67--73.
• 7. Sorokin P. System of sociology. T. 1. Syktyvkar: Komi book. publishing house, 1991. pp. 126-127.
• 8. Zaslavskaya T.I., Ryvkina R.V. Sociology of economic life. Novosibirsk: Nauka, 1991. pp. 196-227.
• 9. V.I. Verkhovin Economic behavior as a subject of sociological analysis // Sociological Research 2004 No. 5

The social role played by each person in the economy is considered in two aspects:

• as a set of norms that determine his behavior in the social system depending on his status social position;
• as the behavior itself that implements these norms.

Theory social roles (role theory) is a set of concepts and approaches that explain the relationships between individuals, social institutions, and society.

In the context of economic sociology, the concept of “social role” reflects such interaction of a person with economic institutions, organizations, groups, when he regularly and over a long period of time reproduces certain stereotypes — patterns of economic behavior, corresponding to his status position in specific circumstances (for example, manager, buyer, seller, investor, saver, etc.) and in specific socio-economic conditions.

Each role corresponding to a certain status of an individual, in turn, represents a set of rights and responsibilities in relation to the individuals around them in a particular situation. The range and number of social roles performed by an individual in the economic life of society depend on the diversity of social groups, types economic activity and the relationships in which the individual participates, as well as his needs and interests.

In the sphere of economic life, the following roles are distinguished:

• social, determined by the individual’s place in the system social relations(for example, socio-professional, gender roles) and divided into active and latent, not manifested in a given situation; institutionalized (official) and spontaneous;
• interpersonal, determined by a person’s place in the system interpersonal relationships in a social organization (for example, a group leader).

Typology of social roles V economic sphere activities can be represented as follows:

• ascriptive - objectively predetermined by birth, age, gender, membership in a certain professional group;
• achievement - achieved through the personal efforts of the individual;
• conventional - standardized and impersonal, built on the basis of the rights and responsibilities of the individual, regardless of who plays these roles;
• interpersonal - when the rights and responsibilities performed depend entirely on the individual characteristics of the participants in interpersonal interaction, their feelings, emotions, and preferences.

An important category of the theory of social roles is “communication”. A person’s acceptance of a particular social role is a complex process, an integral part of which is communication. It replaces identification with another person and non-transfer of one’s own patterns of behavior onto him.

The implementation of a certain role is closely related to the individual’s role expectations (expectations), role set (role-set), role conflict (a state in which a person finds himself due to the fact that the roles he plays are poorly compatible), role tension (role-strain) , adaptation to the role, etc.

Certain forms of economic behavior correspond to the social roles implemented by an individual in the sphere of economics and finance.

Table 2.2. Role functions of objects of economic sociology and forms of economic behavior of the individual

Role behavior of an individual depends on the specific socio-economic conditions of his activity and the state of the economy and in economic sociology is considered in the polyphony (i.e. plurality) of the social roles he performs and their repeated turnover: taxpayer, consumer, insurance broker, banker and lender, entrepreneur, investor and etc. (Table 2.2). In accordance with the role performed, the individual acts, guided, on the one hand, by the normative! requirements, rights and obligations provided by the state and banking institutions for relationships with clients when carrying out financial and banking operations, and on the other hand, their personal motives, showing specific behavioral attitudes and emotional reactions.

Economic behavior- a type of social behavior that reflects the participation of an individual in the economic life of society through various forms of economic activity determined by the social interest and material capabilities of the individual.

Sociological analysis of interpretations of models of economic behavior that are constructed within economic theories. Let's consider several such theories and models of economic behavior.

Model of “search” in the labor market by L. Alchiyan

Describes the behavior of the “owners” of the labor force in a situation of searching for acceptable wage rates under conditions of incomplete information on the labor market. Attention is drawn to the inconsistency of economic interpretations of the theory of unemployment, as well as the insufficiency of the models of the Keyesian neoclassical synthesis of employment.

The model proposed by Alchiyan implies that the temporary rigidity of wage rates is caused by workers' own decisions to withdraw for a certain period of time in order to continue searching for additional information.

J. Keynes' model of investment behavior

Allows us to draw a number of conclusions:

• it is necessary to distinguish between the system of long-term assumptions and calculations of entrepreneurs, whose goal is to forecast the expected income from capital over the entire life of its service, and market speculators, predicting the psychology of the market;
• the mechanism for revaluing assets on the stock exchange in conditions of market uncertainty is a necessary phenomenon;
• one should not expect good results if the expansion of productive capital in the country becomes a by-product of the activities of a gambling house;
• markets for liquidated investments, which give rise to negative trends, must be placed within the framework of tax regulation and access to them by non-professionals must be limited.

Model of “reflexive” behavior in the stock market system by J. Soros

It comes down to the following. The behavior of market subjects is a stochastic (random) process, the objective and subjective components of which cannot be differentiated according to the object-subject principle. The reality of the market, especially the stock market, is a system of mass behavior, where the preferences of acting individuals are embedded in price information and other components on the basis of which decisions are made. The basis of the real behavior of “market agents” is not the principle of market equilibrium, which equalizes their chances, but a continuous process of constant changes, i.e. a consequence of the behavior of specific people who design and implement the future, guided by their own hypotheses, which they constantly revise.

These economic models can be integrated into sociological analysis of economic behavior.

The implementation of social roles in the economy determines the manifestation of a variety of forms of economic behavior of the population (Table 2.2), for example, economic behavior is distinguished: production, labor, insurance, consumer, savings, investment, tax (fiscal), entrepreneurial, monetary.