Some form of stratification is present in all human societies. It is universal and necessary for survival and efficient functioning.
All societies require:
All roles filled by the most capable of performing them
They are performed conscientously
Some roles are more important so must be filled by the most able and talented. Yet there is a limited number of talented people in society.
Davis and Moore (1945) believe ability is inherited. The most able attracts promise of high rewards as a mechanism for people to fulfill roles well. This is a fairly universal agreement.
Criteria for allocation of roles:
'Specificness' of the role - highly specific roles can only be performed by a limited amount of people
Degree of dependency - can society depend on this person to fulfill their duties
Justifies stratification as it is needed to solve the problems of allocating jobs to people.
Evaluation:
Lots of occupations can be seen as essential but are not highly rewarded e.g. nurses.
'Essential' is a subjective concept.
Tumin argues is higher education and it's sacrifices not a privilege in itself? Why does university mean enhanced income and status?
Unequal rewards may be the product of inequalities in power, not just 'meritocratic principles'.
Dysfunctions of stratification are ignored like poverty as a major problem and has a negative impact on all forms of living, so do they have the 'fair' chance to climb the hierarchy?
Evaluation of Davis and Moore (1945):
Tumin argues stratification ignores the advantages of rich children in education through 'ascribed status' like private schools.
Although some social stratification does seem to be universal.
Ignores the impact of social class inequalities at all stages of the class system.