Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 771

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Bringing the Firms Back in: Stratification, Segmentation, and the Organization of Work

Baron, James N., Bielby, William T.·1980·American Sociological Review
DOI 10.2307/2094893
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This essay examines the shift toward explanations in recent studies of inequality. After reviewing this body of research and some of its shortcomings, we examine its theoretical underpinnings, comparing structuralist perspectives on organization derived from institutional economics and neo-Marxism to more orthodox accounts based on neoclassical and industrialism theories. This discussion suggests areas where the different perspectives overlap and diverge. We conclude that arrangements within the firm and their trend are the focus of most perspectives on positional stratification; thus, empirical studies grounded at the organizational level are more likely to inform current debates about the of work than is the growing body of research about structural effects on individual attainment or covariation among industrial/occupational characteristics. Toward that end, an agenda for future research is outlined, focusing on three aspects of organization: (a) the units which comprise the structure of and the dimensions underlying economic segmentation; (b) the effects of sectoral differentiation on technical and administrative arrangements within firms; and (c) temporal changes in how enterprises organize production. We provide some illustrations of the kinds of empirical data and research hypotheses required to link research on segmentation and stratification more closely to studies of organizations.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/2094893

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Baron, J. N., & Bielby, W. T.
Venue
American Sociological Review
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
1980-10
Volume
45
Issue
5
Pages
737
ISSN
0003-1224 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.2307/2094893
OpenAlex
W2065747644
Cited by
771
References
0
FWCI
101.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.