British sociologist Anthony Giddens developed his macro-sociological approach known as the structuration theory. At the beginning of his career, Giddens studied the history of sociology in the books Capitalism and Modern Social Theory: An Analysis of the Writings of Marx, Durkheim and Max Weber (1971), The Class Structure of the Advanced Societies (1973), and Durkheim (1978). In the book Capitalism and Modern Social Theory, Giddens points out that all three sociological classics were focused on understanding and interpreting the most important process of their time -  the transition of society from feudal and traditional to capitalist and modern society. The book The Class Structure of Advanced Societies is an attempt to synthesize Marx's and Weber's views of classes and class structure.

                              Theory of Structuration

Giddens first presented his structuration theory in the books New Rules of Sociological Method (1976) and Central Problems in Sociological Theory (1979) and later gave the most complete picture of this approach in the book The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration (1984). Giddens starts by studying the epistemological foundations of sociology and develops a sociological ontology that views social practices as the basis of the entire social world. Unlike philosophical ontology, which studies questions of being and existence, sociological ontology explores the transcultural and transhistorical qualities of social life. The structuration theory is in the middle between two opposing sociological ontologies - individualism and collectivism. According to the individualistic approach, society and its characteristics are the product of the actions of actors who act freely, because they can understand themselves, society, and their own position in society. Actors pursue their own goals and based on that, they can direct or reshape the society in which they live.

Examples of the individualistic approach are symbolic interactionism, ethnomethodology, phenomenology, and rational choice theories. According to the collectivist approach, society and its characteristics are the product of a social structure, which shapes, directs, and limits the activities of individuals and groups; examples of the collectivist approach are functionalism, structuralism, and Marxism. Structuration theory rejects the extreme views of both approaches, but at the same time incorporates the best aspects of both approaches. The essential difference between a collectivist and an individualist approach can be reduced to the contrast between emphasizing the importance of structure (collectivist approach) and actors (individualist approach). The main goal of Giddens' structuration theory is to overcome this, in his opinion, the apparent dualism between the actions of actors (agency) and structures.

Giddens proposes a reformulation of the lexicon of sociological concepts. In approaches such as Marxism and functionalism, the notion of structure refers to established patterns of social relations that deterministically affect actors, as an external and limiting force that shapes their behavior. Giddens proposes a very different conception of structure. He believes that structure should be understood as abstract models that exist as "virtual" because they exist "outside of time and space" and are "subject-less" and represent, most often, unconscious products of the reproduction of human practice. This view of structure corresponds to the way language is viewed in Lévi-Strauss structuralism. The product of this view of the structure is what Giddens calls the "duality of structure." The structure no longer acts only as something external and limiting but also gives active and acting potential to the actors. The structure provides rules (syntax) by which actors direct their activities, but, on the other hand, it gives them the freedom to act. In that sense, the structure is, at the same time, a medium, but also a product of action. It is this duality of structure that forms the basis of the process of structuration. Structures have rules, which can be more or less formal, explicit, and strict, but always serve as practical knowledge that governs behavior.

Structures also serve as  “resources” that allow actors to manage other people. Giddens divides rules and resources into four main types: 1) performative rules - instructions for performing routine behavior; 2) normative rules - rules that regulate correct behaviors, i.e. routines, in specific situations; 3) authoritative resources - properties and manner of using the capacity to control other actors; 4) allocative resources - allocation of material resources among activities and people. Giddens singles out three types of structures: 1) structures of domination and power, 2) structures of signification and knowledge, and 3) structures of legitimation. The difference between these three types of structure is only analytical because all three types of structure work in every practical activity.

Giddens also gives a new view of the actions of actors (agency). Similar to the individualistic approach, Giddens believes that actors act freely, have the ability to understand themselves, society, and their position in it, strive to achieve their own goals, and are therefore able to direct or reshape the society in which they live. He adapts the scheme of dividing the personality into three parts by dividing the actor's consciousness into three aspects: 1) discursive consciousness, 2) practical consciousness, and 3) unconscious. Three psychic mechanisms are active in the action of the actors: reflexive monitoring, rationalization, and motivation. Practical consciousness and rationalization represent common knowledge that allows actors to act, in a rules-limited, social life. Analysis of practical consciousness is most important for understanding the structuration process.

Actors acquire knowledge of the rules through previous activities, and apply these rules in new situations, but, at the same time, they react in a reflexive way to the specific circumstances of each situation. That reflexive reaction is the core of Giddens's concept of “reflexivity”. Actors are free in their actions, but they generally follow the rules in order to avoid ontological uncertainty. Ontological security is the product of the unconscious part of human consciousness, and it represents a state in which the actors feel calm and secure while performing activities, and the state of greatest security is achieved when the activity is performed routinely. As soon as the actors become unable to carry out routine activities, they feel the psychological effects of anomie and thus tend to create new routines, which are adapted to the changed circumstances. Routine behavior gives individuals ontological security but also rules for everyday social life. Discursive consciousness is the ability of actors to express and explain in words their own knowledge of the structure and its rules and resources. Actors always have an unconscious and practical consciousness of routine activities, but often do not have a discursive consciousness of these activities, that is, they are not able to interpret and explain to themselves and others the rules of the structure that manages routine activities.

Giddens views both the structures and actions of actors as two sides of the same coin, which are connected through social practices. For that reason, structuration theory starts from the basic assumption that social practices are the basis of all the most important social phenomena. Long-term reproduction of similar forms of practice leads to the creation of stable patterns of events and lasting collectives that retain their structural features in the long run. When there is a transformation of social practices, then there is the establishment of new patterns of events and enduring collectives. Except in periods of great social transformation, most social practices routinely take place. Routine behavior occurs within "circuits of reproduction", which can take place within interpersonal encounters or through distance communication, through space and time. Communication through spatial and temporal distance is the basis of Giddens' concept of "time-space distanciation" of social systems.

In addition to structures, there are networks and systems of social relations in society, as well as relations of power and domination. The relations of power and domination exist as a set of relations between superior and subordinate groups within the institutional order of society. Such relationships are ubiquitous in all complex and large societies. Unlike most sociologists who have studied power, Giddens places greater emphasis on the balance of power, or „dialectic of control“, between superior and subordinate groups. Dominant groups base their power on the control of scarce resources, while the very nature of those resources depends on historical circumstances. However, superior groups can achieve their goals only with the active consent of subordinate groups. The ability of subordinate groups to comply with, or resist the will of superior groups provides subordinates with a significant level of bargaining power. When such bargaining power is well exercised, subordinate groups can achieve some of their goals and increase their autonomy.

                              Historical Sociology

In his two-volume book A Contemporary Critique of Historical Materialism (1981, 1985), Giddens applies a structuration approach to the field of historical sociology. He believes that historical processes are the product of a large number of factors, as opposed to reductionist approaches to history that emphasize the influence of one factor, as historical materialism does. Giddens develops his own typology of societies and divides them into: bands, agricultural communities, city-states, empires, feudal societies, capitalist societies, and socialist societies. The basis of Giddens' approach to history and transformations from one type of society to another is found in the analysis of society's institutions.

He singles out four main types of institutions: 1) political, 2) economic, 3) legal, and 4) symbolic. An analysis of all four types of institutions provides Giddens with the opportunity to develop a multi-causal approach to historical change. He sees societies as systems that are subject to great influence by other societies, through political and economic relations or military conflicts. He applied this approach to history to the development of capitalism in Europe in the new century. The most important factors for the development of industrial capitalist society were: the development of administrative power, the creation of an abstract legal system, and the development of a bureaucratic apparatus in charge of tax collection. All three factors first developed within absolutist monarchies and then expanded and strengthened even more with the advent of capitalism and the international system of nation-states. Wars and preparations for wars between European states have contributed to the concentration of administrative power, fiscal reorganization, and the consolidation of absolutism. The simultaneous development of capitalism, industry, and nation-states, after the fall of absolutism, was supported by the fact that each of these phenomena depended on and strengthened the others, while such development was made possible by a broader geopolitical context, as European states became politically and militarily dominant.

Other sociologists that use structuration theory are: Rosemary Crompton, Barbara Riesman, Ira Cohen, Mouzelis Nicos, Stones Rob, and Sung Hung En. British sociologist Rosemary Crompton in the book Gendered Jobs and Social Change (1990) uses the theoretical framework structuration theory to show that gender differences in the labor market must be explained in different ways, depending on the type and structure of a particular profession. Although gender differences persist in almost all professions, in some professions these differences are declining much faster than in others. The success of middle-class men depends on women's domestic work, as well as on the fact that women, on average, do worse jobs and progress in their careers more slowly. To understand economic inequalities, it is necessary to understand gender inequalities. During her fieldwork, Crompton noted that fewer and fewer young women are willing to accept traditional gender roles. Women are the bearers of social change and the transformation of class relations. She has studied class, household, and gender relations in several European countries. She placed more emphasis on data obtained by qualitative methods than on the data provided by official statistics.

American sociologist Barbara Risman uses the theory of structuration as a macro-theoretical framework for her theory. Risman emphasizes that according to the theory of structuration, there are causal feedback relations between individuals and structures - structures affect individuals, but individuals as conscious, reflective, and competent actors change the structure by their behavior. The theory of gender as a social structure adopts this view of social structure. The relationship between the structure, which operates through cultural patterns, on the one side, and the reflective causality of individual behavior, on the other side, should be observed at several levels of analysis, to understand the social structure of gender.

Risman singles out three main levels of analysis: 1) individual level of analysis (socialization and identities); 2) interactional level (cultural expectations, common sense attitudes); 3) institutional level (distribution of material values, forms of formal organization, ideological discourse). Gender structure provides different opportunities and constraints, in different ways, at each of these three levels. At the individual level, the gender structure influences the creation of gender selves; at the interactional level, the gender structure creates different cultural expectations for each gender, even when individuals of both genders are in the same structural positions; at the institutional level, the gender structure, through cultural patterns and legal regulations, creates a different, gender-specific, distribution of material and other resources.

At the individual level, socialization in childhood leads to the internalization of gender roles in members of both genders and thus leads to the creation of gender (innate) selves. At the interactional level, the gender structure creates different status expectations for men and women, women are expected to be filled with empathy and care, while men are expected to be more active and successful in society. Cognitive prejudices enable the reproduction of gender inequalities in everyday life. Social institutions and organizations reproduce gender inequalities at the institutional level. The most important are economic structures that create and maintain different expectations and opportunities for women and men in employment and other aspects of work (earnings, advancement, commitment). The different distribution of material resources between the two genders also maintains structural gender inequalities. Formal legal inequalities are becoming rarer, but even when official laws are formally gender neutral, institutions and organizations (courts, churches, companies) still have different attitudes towards men and women. And, finally, often the official ideology, long after the introduction of formal legal gender equality, retains androcentrism.

Books:

Crompton, Rosemary. Gendered Jobs and Social Change (1990);

Giddens, Anthony.  New Rules of Sociological Method: A Positive Critique of interpretative Sociologies (1976);

     -    Central Problems in Social Theory: Action, Structure and Contradiction in Social Analysis (1979);

     -     A Contemporary Critique of Historical Materialism, Vol. 1: Power, Property and the State (1981);

     -     The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration (1984); 

     -     A Contemporary Critique of Historical Materialism, Vol. 2: The Nation State and Violence (1985);

Riesman, Barbara. Gender in Intimate Relations: A Microstructural Approach (1989).