Role theory is about the tendency of human behavior to form predictable characteristic

patterns if anyone knows the social context in which such behavior arises. It describes their
behavioral patterns, (or roles) by assuming that people in the context appear as members of
a recognized social identity (or position) and that they and others hold the idea of the
behavior in the arrangement. Vocabulary and concerns are popular among both social
scientists and practitioners, and role concepts have resulted in theory and much research.

Role theory appears when social scientists consider serious insights that social life can be
compared to the theater, where actors play a predictable role. Conversely, George Herbert
Mead (a social philosopher) views the role of a developing strategy that individuals are when
they interact with others, and talk about the need for the perspective of understanding others
('taking role') as a condition for effective social interaction. And Jacob Moreno (psychologist)
sees the role as, sometimes a dangerous habit, the tactics adopted by people in primary
relationships, and argue that role play is a useful strategy for learning new roles.

Contrast insights from early contributors are affected by many subsequent writers, and
various theoretical traditions of the role have since emerged. Unfortunately, the supporters
for (or criticism) of different traditions often write as if they did not know any other version. To
illustrate, for some authors the term '' '' roles only refers to the concept of a social position,
for others it refers to the characteristic behavior of members of the social position, and for
the other it indicates mutual hope is held for the behavior of members of the position. Such
inconsistent use poses a problem for the reader to be alert.

Substantive issues may not approve role theorists. For example, some authors use role
concepts to describe social systems, while others apply them to individual behavior. Again,
some writers consider that the role is always tied to the function, while others understand the
role of behavior: which is in line with expectations, directed toward the other in the system,
the will, which validates the status of the actor, or that the self-image project. The difference
in attitude has been reflected both in the intellectual history of the accident and the fact that
role theory has struggled with different forms of social systems.

An early perspective in role theory reflected functionalism. Functional thinking comes from
contributions from Talcott Parsons and, at one time, the dominant orientation in American
sociology. This theory utilizes the role concept, and some writers continue, today, to write as
if the role theory or most of the effort to formalize functionalism.

The functionalist theory is concerned with the problem of describing the social order. Stable
but different behaviors are considered to survive in social systems because they are
accomplished because of the functions and actors in the systems sharing hope for behavior.
Like consensual expectations (or '' roles '') norms are formed to perform, and the suitability
of actors with norms is well-induced as others in the system impose sanction on actors or
because actors are internalized them.

Functionalist thought has been attacked since the 1950s, and many of the basic
assumptions have been challenged. Critics have shown that persistent behavior may or may
not be functional for social systems, that the norms for behavior are often in conflict, the
actor's suit does not need to be produced by the norms but can also reflect other modes of
thought (such as beliefs or preference), that the norm may or may not be supported by
explicit sanctions, that the norms internalized by the actors may be contrary to them
supported by external forces, and that problematic socialization processes. Above all else,
critics have noted that the social system is not a functional entity whose functional think is
described, and that human behavior often responds to power and conflicts of interest in a
negligible way of functionality. As a result of this attack, the interest in the functionalist role
theory has declined, though it is still possible to find a supporting writer (eg, Bates and
Harvey 1975) or criticize (Connell 1979) the role theory as if it were just a gloss for
functionalism.

The importance of organizational role theory begins with the works of Neal Gross, Robert
Kahn, and their colleagues, who question the assumption that the consensual norms
required for social stability. On the contrary, the authors suggest that formal organizations
are often characterized by role conflicts (opposing norms held by powerful actors by others),
that the conflict poses a problem for both actors and organizations where they appear, and
that strategies to overcome or resolve '' 'roles conflicts can be learned. This insight promotes
the two manuscripts applied role roles for organizational analysis and many studies of role
conflicts and conflict resolution roles within the context of the organization.

In addition, the concept of role conflict has proved appealing to scholars who want to
conceptualize or study the problems faced by helpless people, especially married women
who must face opposition from workplace, home maintenance, and support for their
husbands (Stryker and Macke 1978; Lopata 1980; Skinner 1980). Unfortunately (for
arguments), evidence suggests that role conflicts are not always shunned by helpless
people (see Sales et al., 1980) and '' '' resolving the conflict do not necessarily lead to
empowerment.

Despite this problem, research on role conflicts within the organization continues to be
active, and some supporters of new organizational perspectives divert their attention to the
event of a role transition-that is, for phenomena associated with the entry into or departure of
roles.

The importance of role theory also emerged among symbolic interactionists influenced not
only by George Herbert Mead but also by Everett Hughes, Irving Goffman, and other
influential figures. Role is influenced by various forces, including existing norms that apply to
the social position of the actors 'beliefs, and attitudes that hold actors, conception actors and
self-portraits, and the definition of' 'from a developing situation as an actor and others' others
interact. Role does not need to have a common element, but they tend to be very similar
between actors who face common problems in the same condition.

There are four recent trends in the development of role theory that should be noted. First,
although the term '' '' roles continue to appear in most textbooks for basic courses in
sociology and social psychology, it usually does not appear itself as a major concept but is
more likely to surface in chapters on topics such as '' self, '' 'groups,' '' 'institutions,' 'and' 'role
of recruitment.' 'On the contrary, extensive discussions of related roles and concepts can be
found in the texts for various types of advanced courses for this field. To illustrate, consider
the final text for the course on group dynamics. In the latest edition of his highly successful
work, Donelson Forsyth (1999) devoted the whole chapter to the '', '' roles '' and related
issues, and in his new text, Joann Keyton (1999) focuses primarily chapter on the role of
group members '', '' group norms '', '' and related materials. As a rule, portraying role theory
in these sources is clear: '' roles' 'are considered to refer to a particular pattern of behavior
relating to an individual or recognized identity;' common 'norms' expectations for behavior
that may occur to everyone in the group or just for certain identities (such as '' leader ''); and
related concepts such as' '' '' and '' role conflicts often appear ''.
Second, many authors continue to employ role concepts to discuss social relationships
within a particular institution or to describe the lives of those who share their identity. For
example, a great literature has now emerged in relation to the principal's role, and a useful
summary of this work can be found in the recent review by Heck Ronald and Philip Hallinger
(1999). In another example, Biddle (1997) provides a broad overview of new research on the
role of school teacher. Again, Many of these work applied utilize the clear concept of role
theory, with the term '' Commonly used terms to refer to distinguished behaviors, whereas
the notion of behavior that is considered appropriate for the role is usually called '' norm '' or
'' the role of hope. ''

Third, at least for a generation, writers who have written about the differences between
behavior, problems, or views of men and women have used role theory as a vehicle to
interpret their findings, and this interest continues. As an illustration, for many years a major
journal published studies on gender and issues have endured the role of the Sex title, but
recent strong advocates for using role theory to interpret evidence about gender differences
in behavior have appeared in private Alice Eagly (1987, 1995). Eagly asserted that these
differences arose as a result of structural strength in society-then it may be different between
states-but is retained and reproduced as men and women develop the role of the
expectation for their behavior. Given earlier pioneering studies from Margaret Mead, these
statements seem unexceptionable, but they have triggered a thorny criticism from
evolutionary psychologists who prefer to believe that gender differences in behavior become
harsh wires and universal culture, and have emerged from Darwin's selection mechanism.
(See, for example, Archer [1996].) Unfortunately, in 1987 his book on the subject, Eagly did
not make it clear that his argument only involved one version of role theory, and had
evolutionary evolutionist thinks that there might be other versions of the role story will bear
on their concerns. So, in criticizing him, they have made stupid statements about '' the scope
of social role theory, '' and have condemned for the attitude assumed that role theory would
at least suggest.

The fourth and last, the interesting work every few years published by the writer who
apparently just found some version of the role theory and was interested in the potential to
generate insight or solve problems in the area of the family. A good example of this type of
work appears in a recent article by James Montgomery (1998). Montgomery begins by
stating that, in a widely cited work, Granovetter (1985) has insisted that economic action
embedded in social relations and that rational choice theory.

We can see by using the role theory can overcome integrity issues. Which is role theory
explains that everyone have their own specific role. And it is not just explaining what to do
and dont do, it is also include behaviours, emotions and felling as well. For example, as an
auditor their do an audit not only by following the audit procedures, they also need to have
some ethical values such as trustworthiness, responsibility, fairness, caring, and citizenship.
So, if each members of the company using role theory as their model, it can prevent
unethical behaviour among the company which is solve to the integrity issues.