What Is Convergence Theory?

How industrialization affects developing nations.

Danny Lehman/Getty Images 

  • Key Concepts
  • Major Sociologists
  • News & Issues
  • Research, Samples, and Statistics
  • Recommended Reading
  • Archaeology

Convergence theory presumes that as nations move from the early stages of industrialization toward becoming fully industrialized , they begin to resemble other industrialized societies in terms of societal norms and technology.

The characteristics of these nations effectively converge. Ultimately, this could lead to a unified global culture if nothing impeded the process.

Convergence theory has its roots in the functionalist perspective of economics which assumes that societies have certain requirements that must be met if they are to survive and operate effectively. 

Convergence theory became popular in the 1960s when it was formulated by the University of California, Berkeley Professor of Economics Clark Kerr.

Some theorists have since expounded upon Kerr's original premise. They say industrialized nations may become more alike in some ways than in others.

Convergence theory is not an across-the-board transformation. Although technologies may be shared , it's not as likely that more fundamental aspects of life such as religion and politics would necessarily converge—though they may. 

Convergence vs. Divergence

Convergence theory is also sometimes referred to as the "catch-up effect."

When technology is introduced to nations still in the early stages of industrialization, money from other nations may pour in to develop and take advantage of this opportunity. These nations may become more accessible and susceptible to international markets. This allows them to "catch up" with more advanced nations.

If capital is not invested in these countries, however, and if international markets do not take notice or find that opportunity is viable there, no catch-up can occur. The country is then said to have diverged rather than converged.

Unstable nations are more likely to diverge because they are unable to converge due to political or social-structural factors, such as lack of educational or job-training resources. Convergence theory, therefore, would not apply to them. 

Convergence theory also allows that the economies of developing nations will grow more rapidly than those of industrialized countries under these circumstances. Therefore, all should reach an equal footing eventually.

Some examples of convergence theory include Russia and Vietnam, formerly purely communist countries that have eased away from strict communist doctrines as the economies in other countries, such as the United States, have burgeoned.

State-controlled socialism is less the norm in these countries now than is market socialism, which allows for economic fluctuations and, in some cases, private businesses as well. Russia and Vietnam have both experienced economic growth as their socialistic rules and politics have changed and relaxed to some degree.

Former World War II Axis nations including Italy, Germany, and Japan rebuilt their economic bases into economies not dissimilar to those that existed among the Allied Powers of the United States, the Soviet Union, and Great Britain.

More recently, in the mid-20th century, some East Asian countries converged with other more developed nations. Singapore , South Korea, and Taiwan are now all considered to be developed, industrialized nations.

Sociological Critiques

Convergence theory is an economic theory that presupposes that the concept of development is

It frames convergence with supposedly "developed" nations as a goal of so-called "undeveloped" or "developing" nations, and in doing so, fails to account for the numerous negative outcomes that often follow this economically-focused model of development.

Many sociologists, postcolonial scholars, and environmental scientists have observed that this type of development often only further enriches the already wealthy, and/or creates or expands a middle class while exacerbating the poverty and poor quality of life experienced by the majority of the nation in question.

Additionally, it is a form of development that typically relies on the over-use of natural resources, displaces subsistence and small-scale agriculture, and causes widespread pollution and damage to the natural habitat.

convergence theory sociology

By clicking “Accept All Cookies”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts.

What is convergence theory in sociology?

This theory is one of social change that has been given by economic professor Clark Kerr in a book by him and his colleagues called ’Industrialism and Industrial Man’ in the 1960s. The convergence theory is the one which postulates that all the societies as they move from the early industrial development to complete industrialization tend to move towards a condition of similarity in terms of the general societal and technological norms. This is to say that as the societies move towards development they look become alike will similar structures, which means that the differences among the societies will reduce as they are ultimately on the same path of development. This would thus lead to a single global culture.

This theory given by Clark Kerr is what is known as the ‘logic of industrialization’ which he has also mentioned in his writing, this logic is the thesis of the theory and states that industrialization everywhere has similar consequences whether the society is a capitalist one or a communist one.

It is believed that the third world nations are supposed to get out of their conditions of poverty through the process of convergence as they take up the form of western industrial societies.

The convergence theory is often related to the study of modernization, it is believed that the path of development is the one that has been taken by the western industrial societies, which will be undertaken by every society in order to reach complete development and modernization. Thus there is a foxed pattern of development which will be followed. There is thus a convergence if the ideas attitudes and beliefs, thus the overall way of thinking and doing things.

Thus we see that while the convergence theory has made many countries into market economies such as the ones found in the western societies, as it has in Russia and Vietnam which were communist countries earlier and are now market economies.



Sociology Group

Encyclopedia.com -- Online dictionary and encyclopedia of facts, information, and biographies

Convergence Theories

Convergence theories.

The idea that societies move toward a condition of similarity—that they converge in one or more respects—is a common feature of various theories of social change. The notion that differences among societies will decrease over time can be found in many works of eighteenth and nineteenth century social thinkers, from the prerevolutionary French philosophes and the Scottish moral philosophers through de Tocqueville, Toennies, Maine, Marx, Spencer, Weber, and Durkheim (Weinberg 1969; Baum 1974). More recently, the study of "postindustrial" society and the debate over "postmodernist" aspects of contemporary society also reflect to some degree the idea that there is a tendency for broadly similar conditions or attributes to emerge among otherwise distinct and dissimilar societies.

In sociological discourse since the 1960s, the term convergence theory has carried a more specific connotation, referring to the hypothesized link between economic development and concomitant changes in social organization, particularly work and industrial organization, class structure, demographic patterns, characteristics of the family, education, and the role of government in assuring basic social and economic security. The core notion of convergence theory is that as nations achieve similar levels of economic development they will become more alike in terms of these (and other) aspects of social life. In the 1950s and 1960s, predictions of societal convergence were most closely associated with modernization theories, which generally held that developing societies will follow a path of economic development similar to that followed by developed societies of the West. Structural-functionalist theorists, such as Parsons (1951) and Davis (1948), while not actually employing the terminology of convergence theory, paved the way for its development and use in modernization studies through their efforts to develop a systematic statement of the functional prerequisites and structural imperatives of modern industrial society ; these include an occupational structure based on achievement rather than ascription, and the common application of universalistic rather than particularistic evaluative criteria. Also, beginning in the 1960s, convergence theory was invoked to account for apparent similarities in industrial organization and patterns of stratification found in both capitalist and communist nations (Sorokin 1960; Goldthorpe 1964; Galbraith 1967).


The conventional and most controversial application of convergence theory has been in the study of modernization, where it is associated with the idea that the experience of developing nations will follow the path charted by Western industrialized nations. Related to this idea is the notion of a relatively fixed pattern of development through which developing nations must pass as they modernize (Rostow 1960). Inkeles (1966), Inkeles and Smith (1974), and Kahl (1968) pursued the idea of convergence at the level of individual attitudes, values, and beliefs, arguing that the emergence of a "modern" psychosocial orientation accompanies national modernization (see Armer and Schnaiberg 1972 for a critique).

Kerr and colleagues' Industrialism and Industrial Man (1960) offers the classic statement of the "logic of industrialism" thesis, which the authors proposed as a response to Marxian theory's equation of industrial society with capitalism. More specifically, Kerr et al. sought to identify the "inherent tendencies and implications of industrialization for the work place," hoping to construct from this a portrait of the "principal features of the new society" (p. 33). The features common to industrial society, they argued, include rapid changes in science, technology, and methods of production; a high degree of occupational mobility , with continual training and retraining of the work force; increasing emphasis on formal education, particularly in the natural sciences, engineering, medicine, managerial training, and administrative law; a workforce highly differentiated in terms of occupational titles and job classifications; the increasing importance of urban areas as centers of economic activity; and the increasing role of government in providing expanded public services, orchestrating the varied activities of a large and complex economy, and administering the "web of rules" of industrial society. Importantly, Kerr et al. envisioned these developments as cutting across categories of political ideology and political systems.

Although the "logic of industrialism" argument is often cited as a prime example of convergence theory (see Form 1979; Moore 1979; Goldthorpe 1971), Kerr et al. never explicitly made this claim for their study. While mentioning convergence at various points in their study, the authors pay equal attention to important countercurrents leading toward diverse outcomes among industrial societies. The concluding chapter of Industrialism and Industrial Man is, in fact, entitled "Pluralistic Industrialism," and addresses the sources of diversity as well as uniformity among industrial societies. Among sources of diversity identified are the persistence of existing national institutions, enduring cultural differences, variations in the timing of industrialization (late versus early), the nature of a nation's dominant industry, and the size and density of population. Counterposed against these factors are various sources of uniformity, such as technological change, exposure to the industrial world, and a worldwide trend toward increased access to education leading to an attenuation of social and economic inequality.

The critique of convergence theory in the study of modernization recalls critiques of earlier theories of societal evolution advanced under the rubric of social Darwinism in the nineteenth century and structural functionalism in the mid-twentieth century. The use of convergence theory to analyze modernization has been attacked for its alleged assumptions of unilinearity and determinism (i.e., a single path of development that all societies must follow), its teleological or historicist character (Goldthorpe 1971), its Western ideological bias (Portes 1973), and for ignoring the structurally dependent position of less-developed countries in the world economy (Wallerstein 1974). Yet a careful review of the literature suggests that many criticisms have often tended to caricature convergence theory rather than addressing its application in actual research studies. Since the 1960s few if any researchers have explicitly claimed convergence theory, at least in its unreconstructed form, as their own. For example, Moore (1979), an exponent of the "conventional" view of modernization, subtitled his book, World Modernization , "the limits of convergence," and went to great pains to distance himself from the "model modernized society" position associated with early versions of convergence theory (see Moore 1979, pp. 26–28, 150–153). And Parsons (1966), whose name is virtually synonymous with structural functionalism, concluded one of his later writings on comparative sociology with the statement that "any linear theory of societal evolution" is "untenable" (p. 114). As Form (1979) observes, convergence theory passed through a cycle typical of social science theories: a burst of initial interest and enthusiasm, followed by intense criticism and controversy, finally giving way to neglect. The major challenge to those wishing to revive convergence theory and rescue it from its critics is to specify its theoretical underpinnings more precisely, to develop appropriate empirical studies, and finally account for variation as well as similarity among observed cases.


In recent years Inkeles (1980, 1981; also Inkeles and Sirowy 1983) has made the most systematic attempt to reformulate convergence theory and respecify its core hypotheses and propositions. Inkeles (1981) argues that earlier versions of convergence theory failed to distinguish adequately between different elements of the social system, which is problematic because these elements not only change at different speeds, but may move in opposite directions. He proposes dividing the social system into a minimum of five elements for purposes of assessing convergence: modes of production and patterns of resource utilization; institutional arrays and institutional forms; structures or patterns of social relationships; systems of popular attitudes, values, and behavior; and systems of political and economic control. Finally, he specifies the different forms convergence and divergence may take: (1) simple convergence involving the movement from diversity to uniformity; (2) convergence from different directions involving movement toward a common point by an increase for some cases and a decrease for others; (3) convergence via the crossing of thresholds rather than changes in absolute differences; (4) divergent paths toward convergence, where short-term fluctuations eventually fall into line or a "deviant" case that eventually defines the norm for other cases (for example, France's move toward small family size in the late eighteenth century); and (5) convergence in the form of parallel change, where nations all moving in the same direction along some dimension of change continue to remain separated by a gap. Although parallel change of this sort does not represent true convergence, it is consistent with the key assumption of convergence theory, namely, that "insofar as they face comparable situations of action . . . nations and individuals will respond in broadly comparable ways" (p. 21).

Inkeles (1981) also describes various forms that divergence may take: (1) simple divergence, the mirror image of simple convergence, in which movement occurs away from a common point toward new points further apart than the original condition; (2) convergence with crossover, where lines intersect and then proceed to spread apart; and (3) convergent trends masking underlying diversity (for example, although the United States , Great Britain , and Sweden all experienced large increases in public assistance programs from 1950 to the early 1970s, the social groups receiving benefits were quite different among the three nations, as were the political dynamics associated with the spending increases within each nation). Finally, Inkeles (1981) notes the importance of selecting appropriate units of analysis, levels of analysis, and the time span for which convergence, divergence, or parallel change can be assessed. These comments echo earlier sentiments expressed by Weinberg (1969) and Baum (1974) about how to salvage the useful elements of standard convergence theory while avoiding the pitfalls of a simplistic functionalist-evolutionary approach. Common to these attempts to revive convergence theory is the exhortation to develop more and better empirical research on specific institutional spheres and social processes. As the following sections demonstrate, a good deal of work along these lines is already being done across a wide range of substantive questions and topical concerns that can aptly be described in the plural as convergence theories , indicating their revisionist and more pluralistic approach.


Despite criticisms of Kerr and colleagues' (1960) concept of the logic of industrialism, the question of convergent trends in industrial organization has remained the focus of active debate and much research. The large research literature related on this question, reviewed by Form (1979), has produced mixed evidence with respect to convergence. Studies by Shiba (1973, cited in Form 1979), Form (1976), and Form and Kyu Han (1988), covering a range of industrializing and advanced industrial societies found empirical support for convergence in workers' adaptation to industrial and related social systems, while Gallie's (1977, cited in Form 1979) study of oil refineries in Great Britain and France found consistent differences in workers' attitudes toward systems of authority. On the question of sectoral and occupational shifts, Gibbs and Browning's (1966) twelve-nation study of industrial and occupational division of labor found both similarities—consistent with the convergence hypothesis—as well as differences. Studies across nations varying in levels of industrial development revealed only "small and unsystematic differences" in worker commitment (Form 1979, p. 9), thus providing some support for the convergence hypothesis. Japan has been regarded as an exceptional case among industrialized nations because of its strong cultural traditions based on mutual obligation between employers and employees. These characteristics led Dore (1973), for example, to argue vigorously against the convergence hypothesis for Japan. A more recent study by Lincoln and Kalleberg (1990) "stands convergence on its head," arguing that patterns of work organization in the United States are being impelled in the direction of the Japanese model. Finally, with respect to women in the labor force, the evidence of convergence is mixed. Some studies found no relationship between female labor-force participation and level of industrialization (Ferber and Lowry 1977; Safilios-Rothchild 1971), though there is strong evidence of a trend toward increasing female participation in nonagricultural employment among advanced industrial societies (Paydarfar 1967; Wilensky 1968) along with the existence of dual labor markets stratified by sex, a pattern found in both communist and capitalist nations in the 1970s (Cooney 1975; Bibb and Form 1977; Lapidus 1976).


Closely related to the study of industrial organization is the question of converging patterns of stratification and mobility. The attempt to discover common features of the class structure across advanced industrial societies is a central concern for social theorists of many stripes. The question has inspired intense debate among both neo-Weberian and Marxist sociologists, although the latter, for obvious ideological reasons, tend to eschew the language of convergence theory. An early statement of the class convergence thesis was made by Lipset and Zetterberg (1959), to the effect that observed rates of mobility between social classes tend to be similar from one industrial society to another. Erikson et al. (1983) conducted a detailed test of the class mobility convergence hypothesis in England, France, and Sweden, and found little support for it. They conclude that the "process of industrialization is associated with very variable patterns . . . of the social division of labour" (p. 339).

A subcategory of comparative stratification research concerns the evidence of convergence in occupational prestige. A study published in 1956 by Inkeles and Rossi, based on data from six industrialized societies, concluded that the prestige hierarchy of occupations was "relatively invariable" and tended to support the hypothesis that modern industrial systems are "highly coherent. . . relatively impervious to the influence of traditional culture patterns" (p. 329). Although the authors did not specifically mention convergence, their conclusions were fully consistent with the idea of emergent similarities. A subsequent study by Treiman (1977) extended the comparison of occupational prestige to some sixty nations, ranging from the least developed to the most developed. The study found that occupational-prestige rankings were markedly similar across all societies, raising the question of whether convergence theory or an explanation based on the functional imperatives of social structure of all complex societies, past or present, was most consistent with the empirical findings. The conclusion was that both explanations had some merit, since although all complex societies—whether developed, undeveloped, or developing—showed similar occupational-prestige rankings, there was also evidence that the more similar societies were in levels of industrialization, the more similar their patterns of occupational-prestige evaluation appeared to be.


The theory of demographic transition provides one of the most straightforward examples of convergence. The essence of the theory is that fertility and mortality rates covary over time in a predictable and highly uniform manner. Moreover, these changes are directly linked to broad developmental patterns, such as the move from a rural, agriculturally based economy to an urban-industrial one, increases in per capita income, and adult literacy (Berelson 1978). In the first stage of the demographic transition, both fertility rates and death rates are high, with population remaining fairly constant. In the second stage, death rates drop (as a result of improvements in living conditions and medical care) while fertility rates remain high, and population levels increase rapidly. In the third stage, fertility rates begin to decline, with total size of the population leveling off or even decreasing. This simple model works remarkably well in accounting for demographic patterns observed among all industrialized (and many industrializing) societies during the post- World War II period. A large spread in fertility rates among nations at the beginning of the 1950s gave way to declining rates of fertility ending with a nearly uniform pattern of zero population growth in the 1970s.

The convergent tendencies predicted by the theory of demographic transition have not gone unchallenged, however. Freedman (1979), for example, suggests that cultural factors mediate the effects of social structural factors central to transition theory. Coale (1973) and Teitelbaum (1975) note that demographic transition theory has not provided much explanatory or predictive power with regard to the timing of population changes or the regional variations observed within nations undergoing change.

Inkeles (1980) explored the effects of putative convergent tendencies discussed above for family patterns. While he found evidence of convergence in some aspects of family life, other patterns continue "to be remarkably stable in the face of great variation in their surrounding socio-economic conditions" (p. 34). Aspects of family life that show clear convergent patterns include the trend toward falling fertility rates and a shift in relative power and resource control in the direction of increasing autonomy of women and declining authority of parents. Other aspects of the family, such as age at first marriage, appear to present a more complex picture, with short-term fluctuations obscuring long-term changes, and great variation from one culture to another. Still other characteristics of family life seem resistant to change; cited as examples in Inkeles (1980) are cultural patterns such as veneration of elders in many Asian societies, basic human needs for companionship and psychological support, and the role of husbands helping wives with housework. In all, Inkeles (1980) estimates that only about half the indicators of family life he examined showed any convergence, and even then not always of a linear nature.

Following Inkeles' (1981) reformulation of convergence theory, Inkeles and Sirowy (1983) studied the educational systems of seventy-three rich and poor nations. Among thirty different "patterns of change" in educational systems examined, they found evidence of marked convergence in fourteen, moderate convergence in four, considerable variability in nine, mixed results in two, and divergence in only one. Based on these findings, they conclude that the tendency toward convergence on common structures is "pervasive and deep. It is manifested at all levels of the educational system, and affects virtually every major aspect of that system" (p. 326). Also worthy of note is that while the authors take the conventional position that convergence is a response to pressures arising from a complex, technologically advanced social and economic system, they also identify diffusion via integration of networks through which ideas, standards, and practices in education are shared. These networks operate largely through international organizations, such as UNESCO and the OECD; their role as mediating structures in a process leading toward cross-national similarities in education constitutes an important addition to convergence theory, with wide-ranging implications for convergence in other institutions.


The development of the welfare state has inspired active theoretical debate and empirical research on convergence theory, with researchers divided over the nature and extent of convergence found across nations. On the one hand, there is indisputable evidence that extensive social security , health care, and related benefit programs is restricted to nations that have reached a level of economic development where a sufficient surplus exists to support such efforts. Moreover, the development of programs of the welfare state appears to be empirically correlated with distinct bureaucratic and demographic patterns that are in turn grounded in economic development. For example, Wilensky (1975) found that among sixty nations studied the proportion of the population sixty-five years of age and older and the age of social security programs were the major determinants of levels of total welfare-state spending as a percent of gross national product . Since levels of economic development and growth of the elderly population both represent areas of convergence among advanced societies, it is reasonable to expect that patterns of welfare-state development will also tend to converge. Indeed, in such respects as the development of large and expensive pension and health-care programs, of which the elderly are the major clientele, this is the case (Coughlin and Armour 1982; Hage et al. 1989). Other empirical studies have found evidence of convergence in public attitudes toward constituent programs of the welfare state (Coughlin 1980), in egalitarian political movements affecting welfare effort across nations (Williamson and Weiss 1979), and in levels of spending (Pryor 1968), normative patterns (Mishra 1976), and social control functions of welfare-state programs across capitalist and communist nations (Armour and Coughlin 1985).

Other researchers have challenged the idea of convergence in the welfare state. In a historical study of unemployment programs in thirteen Western European nations, Alber (1981) found no evidence that programs had become more alike in eligibility criteria, methods of financing, or generosity of benefits, although he did find some evidence of convergence in duration of unemployment benefits in nations with compulsory systems. A study conducted by O'Connor (1988) testing the convergence hypothesis with respect to trends in welfare spending from 1960 to 1980 concluded that "despite the adoption of apparently similar welfare programmes in economically developed countries there is not only diversity but divergence in welfare effort. Further, the level of divergence is increasing" (p. 295). A much broader challenge to the convergence hypothesis comes from studies focusing on variations in welfare-state development among western capitalist democracies. Hewitt (1977), Castles (1978, 1982), and Korpi (1983), to cite a few leading examples, argue that variations across nations in the strength and reformist character of labor unions and social democratic parties account for large differences in the levels of spending for and redistributive impact of welfare-state programs. However, the disagreement among these studies and scholars arguing for convergence may be simply a function of case selection. For example, in a study of nineteen rich nations, Wilensky (1976, 1981) linked cross-national diversity in the welfare state to differences in "democratic corporatism," and secondarily to the presence of Catholic political parties, thus rejecting the simplistic idea that the convergence observed across many nations at widely different levels of economic development extends to the often divergent policy developments in the relatively small number of advanced capitalist societies.

The debate over convergence in the welfare state is certain to continue. A major obstacle in resolving the question involves disagreement on the nations chosen for study, selection and construction of measures (see Uusitalo 1984), and judgments about the time frame appropriate for a definitive test of the convergence hypothesis. Wilensky et al. (1985, pp. 11–12) sum up the mixed status of current research on convergence in welfare-state development as follows:

Convergence theorists are surely on solid ground when they assert that programs to protect against the seven or eight basic risks of industrial life are primarily responses to economic development . . . . However, showing that societies have adopted the same basic programs. . . is only a partial demonstration of convergence insofar as it does not demonstrate convergence in substantive features of the programs or in the amount of variation among affluent countries compared to poor countries.


Growing attention to a variety of large-scale changes in economic relations, technology, and cultural relations, broadly subsumed under the description "globalization," has inspired renewed interest in the ideas of convergence and modernity (see Robertson 1992 for a critical account). The literature on globalization has several threads. One approach focuses on the economic and cultural impact of transnational capitalist enterprises that are judged to be responsible for the spread of a pervasive ideology and culture of consumerism (Sklair 1995). Ritzer (1993) summarizes this phenomenon as the "McDonaldization of society"—a broad reference to the ubiquity and influence of the consumer brand names (and the large corporate interests behind them) that are instantly recognizable in virtually every country in the world today. The main implication of this perspective is that indigenous industries, habits, and culture are rapidly being driven aside or even into extinction by the "juggernaut" of the world capitalist economy dominated by a relatively few powerful interests.

Meyer et al. (1997) provide a different interpretation of globalization in their work on "world society." Although they argue that "many features of the contemporary nation-state derive from a worldwide model constructed and propagated through global cultural and associational processes" (pp. 144–145), the essence of their position is that nations are drawn toward a model that is "surprisingly consensual. . .in virtually all the domains of rationalized social life" (p. 145). Meyer et al. contend that various core principles, such as those legitimating human rights and favoring environmentalism, do not emerge spontaneously as an imperative of modernity, but rather diffuse rapidly among nations worldwide through the agency of international organizations, networks of scientists and professionals, and other forms of association. Although not referring specifically to convergence theory, this world society and culture approach makes a strong case for the emergence of widely shared structural and cultural similarities, many of which hold out the promise of improvement, among otherwise diverse nation-states.

The rapid growth of telecommunications and computing technology, especially apparent in the emergence of the Internet as a major social and economic phenomenon of the 1990s, presents yet another aspect of globalization that holds profound implications for possible societal convergence. However important and wide-ranging, the precise patterns that will ultimately emerge from these technological innovations are not yet clear. While new computing and communication technologies compress the time and space dimensions of social interaction (Giddens 1990), and have the potential to undercut national identities and cultural differences along the lines envisioned by McLuhan's (1960) "global village," the same forces of advanced technology that can level traditional differences may ultimately reinforce the boundaries of nation, culture, and social class. For example, even as the computers and related communication technologies become more ever more widely disseminated, access to and benefits from the new technologies appear to be disproportionately concentrated among the "haves," leaving the "have nots" more and more excluded from participation (Wresch 1996). Over time, such disparities might well serve to widen differences both across and within nations, thus leading toward divergence rather than convergence.

Finally, interest in convergence has also been given a boost by various political developments in the 1990s. In particular, the twin developments of the collapse of communism in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union and the progressive weakening of economic and political barriers in Europe are notable in this regard. The demise of state socialism has revived interest in the possibilities of global economic and political convergence among advanced industrial societies (see, for example, Lenski et al. 1991, p. 261; Fukuyama 1992). Although ongoing economic and political turmoil in the "transition to capitalism" in the former Soviet Union during the 1990s may cast serious doubt on the long-term prospects for convergence, developments have clearly moved in that direction with astonishing speed.

The continuing movement toward unification in Europe associated with the European Union (EU, formerly the European Community ) represents another significant case of political and economic convergence on a regional scale. The gradual abolition of restrictions on trade, the movement of labor, and travel among EU nations (and not least of all the establishment of a single currency in 1999), and the harmonization of social policies throughout the EU, all signal profound changes toward growing convergence in the region that promises to continue into the twenty-first century.

The idea of convergence is both powerful and intuitively attractive to sociologists across a range of backgrounds and interests (Form 1979). It is difficult to conceive of an acceptable macro theory of social change that does not refer to the idea of convergence in one way or another. Despite the controversy over, and subsequent disillusionment with, early versions of convergence theory in the study of modernization, and the often mixed results of empirical studies discussed above, it is clear that the concept of societal convergence (and convergence theories that allow for the possibility of divergence and invariance) provides a useful and potentially powerful analytical framework within which to conduct cross-national studies across a broad range of social phenomena. Even where the convergence hypothesis ultimately ends up being rejected, the perspective offered by convergence theories can provide a useful point of departure for research. Appropriately reformulated, focused on elements of the social system amenable to empirical study, and stripped of the ideological baggage associated with its earlier versions, convergence theories hold promise to advance the understanding of the fundamental processes and regularities of social change.

Alber, Jens 1981 "Government Responses to the Challenge of Unemployment: The Development of Unemployment Insurance in Western Europe . In Peter Flora and Arnold J. Heidenheimer, eds., The Development of Welfare States in Europe and America . New Brunswick , N.J.: Transaction Books.

Armer, Michael, and Allan Schnaiberg 1972 "Measuring Individual Modernity: A Near Myth." American Sociological Review 37:301–316.

Armour, Philip K., and Richard M. Coughlin 1985 " Social Control and Social Security: Theory and Research on Capitalist and Communist Nations." Social Science Quarterly 66:770–788.

Aron, Raymond 1967 The Industrial Society . New York : Simon and Schuster.

Baum, Rainer C. 1974 "Beyond Convergence: Toward Theoretical Relevance in Quantitative Modernization Research." Sociological Inquiry 44:225–240.

Bendix, Reinhard 1967 "Tradition and Modernity Reconsidered." Comparative Studies in Society and History 9:292–346.

Berelson, B. 1978 "Prospects and Programs for Fertility Reduction: What? Where?" Population and Development Review 4:579–616.

Bibb, R. and W.H. Form 1977 "The Effects of Industrial, Occupational, and Sex Stratification in Blue-Collar Markets." Social Forces 55:974–996.

Castles, Francis 1982 "The Impact of Parties on Public Expenditure." In Frances Castles, ed., The Impact of Parties: Politics and Policies in Democratic Capitalist States . Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage.

——1978 The Social Democratic Image of Society . London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Coale, Ansley J. 1973 "The Demographic Transition." In The International Population Conference, Liège . Liège, Belgium: International Union for the Scientific Study of Population.

Cooney, R.S. 1975 "Female Professional Work Opportunities: A Cross-National Study." Demography 12:107–120.

Coughlin, Richard M. 1980 Ideology, Public Opinion and Welfare Policy . Berkeley: University of California , Institute of International Studies.

——, and Philip K. Armour 1982 "Sectoral Differentiation in Social Security Spending in the OECD Nations." Comparative Social Research 6:175–199.

Davis, Kingsley 1948 Human Society . New York : Macmillan.

Dore, Ronald 1973 British Factory-Japanese Factory . Berkeley: University of California Press.

Erikson, Robert, John H. Goldthorpe, and Lucienne Portocarero 1983 "Intergenerational Class Mobility and the Convergence Thesis: England, France, and Sweden." British Journal of Sociology 34:303–343.

Ferber, M., and H. Lowry 1977 "Women's Place: National Differences in the Occupational Mosaic." Journal of Marketing 41:23–30.

Form, William 1979 "Comparative Industrial Sociology and the Convergence Hypothesis." Annual Review of Sociology 4:1–25.

——1976 Blue-Collar Stratification . Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.

——, and Bae Kyu Han 1988 "Convergence Theory and the Korean Connection." Social Forces 66:618–644.

Fox, William S., and William W. Philliber 1980 "Class Convergence: An Empirical Test." Sociology and Social Research 64:236–248.

Freedman, Ronald 1979 "Theories of Fertility Decline: A Reappraisal. Social Forces 58:1–17.

Fukuyama, Francis 1992 The End of History and the Last Man . New York: Free Press.

Galbraith, John Kenneth 1967 The New Industrial State . Houghton-Mifflin.

Gibbs, J.P., and H.L. Browning 1966 "The Division of Labor, Technology, and the Organization of Production in Twelve Countries." American Sociological Review 31:81–92.

Giddens, Anthony 1990 The Consequences of Modernity . Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press.

Goldthorpe, John H. 1971 "Theories of Industrial Society: Reflections on the Recrudescence of Historicism and the Future of Futurology." Archives of European Sociology 12:263–288.

——1964 "Social Stratification in Industrial Society." In P. Halmos, ed., The Development of Industrial Societies , 97–123. Keele, Eng.: University of Keele.

Hage, Jerald, Robert Hanneman, and Edward T. Gargan 1989 State Responsiveness and State Activism . London: Unwin Hyman.

Hewitt, Christopher 1977 "The Effect of Political Democracy and Social Democracy on Equality in Industrial Societies: A Cross-National Comparison." American Sociological Review 42:450–464.

Inkeles, Alex 1981 "Convergence and Divergence in Industrial Societies." In M.O. Attir, B.H. Holzner, and Z. Suda, eds., Directions of Change: Modernization Theory, Research, and Realities , 3–38. Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press.

——1980 "Modernization and Family Patterns: A Test of Convergence Theory." In D.W. Hoover and J.T.A. Koumoulides, eds., Conspectus of History , 31–64. Cambridge, Eng.: Cambridge University Press.

——1966 "The Modernization of Man." In M. Weiner, ed., Modernization New York: Basic Books.

——, and Larry Sirowy 1983 "Convergent and Divergent Trends in National Educational Systems." Social Forces 62:303–333.

Inkeles, Alex, and David E. Smith 1974 Becoming Modern . Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

Inkeles, Alex, and Peter H. Rossi 1956 "National Comparisons of Occupational Prestige." American Journal of Sociology 61:329–339.

Kahl, J.A. 1968 The Measurement of Modernization: A Study of Values in Brazil and Mexico . Austin: University of Texas Press.

Kerr, Clark, John T. Dunlap, Frederick H. Harbison, and Charles A. Myers 1960 Industrialism and Industrial Man . Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

Korpi, Walter 1983 The Democratic Class Struggle . London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Lapidus, Gail W. 1976 "Occupational Segregation and Public Policy : A Comparative Analysis of American and Soviet Patterns." In M. Blaxell and B. Reagan, eds., Women and the Workplace Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Lenski, Gerhard, Jean Lenski, and Patrick Nolan 1991 Human Societies , 6th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Lincoln, James R., and Arne L. Kalleberg 1990 Culture, Control, and Commitment: A Study of Work Organization and Work Attitudes in the United States and Japan . Cambridge, Eng.: Cambridge University Press.

Lipset, Seymour M., and Hans Zetterberg 1959 " Social Mobility in Industrial Societies." In S.M. Lipset and R. Bendix, eds., Social Mobility in Industrial Society .London: Heinemann.

McLuhan, Marshall 1960 Exploration in Communications . Boston: Beacon Press.

Meyer, John W., John Boli, George M. Thomas, and Francisco O. Ramirez 1997 "World Society and the Nation-State." American Journal of Sociology 103:144–181.

Mishra, Ramesh 1976 "Convergence Theory and Social Change: The Development of Welfare in Britain and the Soviet Union." Comparative Studies in Society and History 18:28–56.

Moore, Wilbert E. 1979 World Modernization: The Limits of Convergence . New York: Elsevier.

O'Connor, Julia S. 1988 "Convergence or Divergence?: Change in Welfare Effort in OECD Countries 1960–1980." European Journal of Political Research 16:277–299.

Parsons, Talcott 1966 Societies: Evolutionary and Comparative Perspectives . Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall.

Parsons, Talcott 1951 The Social System . Glencoe, Ill.: The Free Press.

Paydarfar, A.A. 1967 "Modernization Process and Demographic Changes." Sociological Review 15:141–153.

Portes, Alejandro 1973 "Modernity and Development: A Critique." Comparative International Development 8:247–279.

Pryor, Frederick 1968 Public Expenditure in Capitalist and Communist Nations . Homewood, Ill.: Irwin.

Ritzer, George 1993 The McDonaldization of Society . Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage.

Robertson, Roland 1992 Globalization: Social Theory and Global Culture . London and Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage.

Rostow, Walt W. 1960 The Stages of Economic Growth . Cambridge, Eng.: Cambridge University Press.

Safilios-Rothchild, C. 1971 "A Cross-Cultural Examination of Women's Marital, Educational and Occupational Aspirations." Acta Sociologica 14:96–113.

Sklair, Leslie 1995 Sociology of the Global System . Baltimore, Md.: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Sorokin, Pitirim A. 1960 "Mutual Convergence of the United States and the U.S.S.R. to the Mixed Sociocultural Type." International Journal of Comparative Sociology . 1:143–176.

Teitelbaum, M.S. 1975 "Relevance of Demographic Transition for Developing Countries." Science 188:420–425.

Treiman, Donald J. 1977 Occupational Prestige in Comparative Perspective . New York: Academic Press.

Uusitalo, Hannu 1984 "Comparative Research on the Determinants of the Welfare State: The State of the Art." European Journal of Political Research 12:403–442.

Wallerstein, Immanuel 1974 "The Rise and Future Demise of the World Capitalist System: Concepts for Comparative Analysis." Comparative Studies in Social History 16:287–415.

Weed, Frank J. 1979 "Industrialization and Welfare Systems: A Critical Evaluation of the Convergence Hypothesis." International Journal of Comparative Sociology 20:282–292.

Weinberg, Ian 1969 "The Problem of the Convergence of Industrial Societies: A Critical Look at the State of the Theory." Comparative Studies in Society and History 11:1–15.

Wilensky, Harold L. 1981 "Leftism, Catholicism, and Democratic Corporatism: The Role of Political Parties in Recent Welfare State Development." In Peter Flora and Arnold J. Heidenheimer, eds., The Development of Welfare States in Europe and America , 345–382. New Brunswick , N.J.: Transaction Books.

——1976 The "New Corporatism": Centralization and the Welfare State . Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage.

——1975 The Welfare State and Equality . Berkeley: University of California Press.

——1968 "Women's Work: Economic Growth, Ideology, Structure." Industrial Relations 7:235–248.

——, Gregory M. Luebbert, Susan Reed Hahn, and Adrienne M. Jamieson 1985 Comparative Social Policy: Theory, Methods, Findings . Berkeley: University of California, Institute of International Studies.

Williamson, John B., and Joseph W. Weiss 1979 "Egalitarian Political Movements, Social Welfare Effort and Convergence Theory: A Cross-National Analysis." Comparative Social Research 2:289–302.

Williamson, John B., and Jeanne J. Fleming 1977 "Convergence Theory and the Social Welfare Sector: A Cross-National Analysis." International Journal of Comparative Sociology 18:242–253.

Wresch, William 1996 Disconnected: Haves and Have Nots in the Information Age . New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press.

Richard M. Coughlin

Cite this article Pick a style below, and copy the text for your bibliography.

" Convergence Theories . " Encyclopedia of Sociology . . Encyclopedia.com. 22 Feb. 2023 < https://www.encyclopedia.com > .

"Convergence Theories ." Encyclopedia of Sociology . . Encyclopedia.com. (February 22, 2023). https://www.encyclopedia.com/social-sciences/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/convergence-theories

"Convergence Theories ." Encyclopedia of Sociology . . Retrieved February 22, 2023 from Encyclopedia.com: https://www.encyclopedia.com/social-sciences/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/convergence-theories

Citation styles

Encyclopedia.com gives you the ability to cite reference entries and articles according to common styles from the Modern Language Association (MLA), The Chicago Manual of Style, and the American Psychological Association (APA).

Within the “Cite this article” tool, pick a style to see how all available information looks when formatted according to that style. Then, copy and paste the text into your bibliography or works cited list.

Because each style has its own formatting nuances that evolve over time and not all information is available for every reference entry or article, Encyclopedia.com cannot guarantee each citation it generates. Therefore, it’s best to use Encyclopedia.com citations as a starting point before checking the style against your school or publication’s requirements and the most-recent information available at these sites:

Modern Language Association


The Chicago Manual of Style


American Psychological Association


More From encyclopedia.com

About this article, you might also like.



In order to continue enjoying our site, we ask that you confirm your identity as a human. Thank you very much for your cooperation.

Chapter 12: Work and the Economy

Reading: theoretical perspectives on economics, convergence theory.

We have seen how the economies of some capitalist countries such as the United States have features that are very similar to socialism. Some industries, particularly utilities, are either owned by the government or controlled through regulations. Public programs such as welfare, Medicare, and Social Security exist to provide public funds for private needs. We have also seen how several large communist (or formerly communist) countries such as Russia, China, and Vietnam have moved from state-controlled socialism with central planning to market socialism, which allows market forces to dictate prices and wages and for some business to be privately owned. In many formerly communist countries, these changes have led to economic growth compared to the stagnation they experienced under communism (Fidrmuc 2002).

In studying the economies of developing countries to see if they go through the same stages as previously developed nations did, sociologists have observed a pattern they call convergence. This describes the theory that societies move toward similarity over time as their economies develop.

Convergence theory explains that as a country’s economy grows, its societal organization changes to become more like that of an industrialized society. Rather than staying in one job for a lifetime, people begin to move from job to job as conditions improve and opportunities arise. This means the workforce needs continual training and retraining. Workers move from rural areas to cities as they become centers of economic activity, and the government takes a larger role in providing expanded public services (Kerr et al. 1960).

Supporters of the theory point to Germany, France, and Japan—countries that rapidly rebuilt their economies after World War II. They point out how, in the 1960s and 1970s, East Asian countries like Singapore, South Korea, and Taiwan converged with countries with developed economies. They are now considered developed countries themselves.

Map of Europe indicating countries which are members, candidate members, potential candidate members, and possible members of the European Union.

Sociologists look for signs of convergence and divergence in the societies of countries that have joined the European Union. (Map courtesy of the European Union)

To experience this rapid growth, the economies of developing countries must to be able to attract inexpensive capital to invest in new businesses and to improve traditionally low productivity. They need access to new, international markets for buying the goods. If these characteristics are not in place, then their economies cannot catch up. This is why the economies of some countries are diverging rather than converging (Abramovitz 1986).

Another key characteristic of economic growth regards the implementation of technology. A developing country can bypass some steps of implementing technology that other nations faced earlier. Television and telephone systems are a good example. While developed countries spent significant time and money establishing elaborate system infrastructures based on metal wires or fiber-optic cables, developing countries today can go directly to cell phone and satellite transmission with much less investment.

Another factor affects convergence concerning social structure. Early in their development, countries such as Brazil and Cuba had economies based on cash crops (coffee or sugarcane, for instance) grown on large plantations by unskilled workers. The elite ran the plantations and the government, with little interest in training and educating the populace for other endeavors. This restricted economic growth until the power of the wealthy plantation owners was challenged (Sokoloff and Engerman 2000). Improved economies generally lead to wider social improvement. Society benefits from improved educational systems and allowed people more time to devote to learning and leisure.

Theoretical Perspectives on the Economy

Now that we’ve developed an understanding of the history and basic components of economies, let’s turn to theory. How might social scientists study these topics? What questions do they ask? What theories do they develop to add to the body of sociological knowledge?

Functionalist Perspective

Someone taking a functional perspective will most likely view work and the economy as a well-oiled machine that is designed for maximum efficiency. The Davis-Moore thesis, for example, suggests that some social stratification is a social necessity. The need for certain highly skilled positions combined with the relative difficulty of the occupation and the length of time it takes to qualify will result in a higher reward for that job and will provide a financial motivation to engage in more education and a more difficult profession (Davis and Moore 1945). This theory can be used to explain the prestige and salaries that go with careers only available to those with doctorates or medical degrees.

The functionalist perspective would assume that the continued health of the economy is vital to the health of the nation, as it ensures the distribution of goods and services. For example, we need food to travel from farms (high-functioning and efficient agricultural systems) via roads (safe and effective trucking and rail routes) to urban centers (high-density areas where workers can gather). However, sometimes a dysfunction––a function with the potential to disrupt social institutions or organization (Merton 1968)––in the economy occurs, usually because some institutions fail to adapt quickly enough to changing social conditions. This lesson has been driven home recently with the bursting of the housing bubble. Due to risky lending practices and an underregulated financial market, we are recovering from the after-effects of the Great Recession, which Merton would likely describe as a major dysfunction.

Some of this is cyclical. Markets produce goods as they are supposed to, but eventually the market is saturated and the supply of goods exceeds the demands. Typically the market goes through phases of surplus, or excess, inflation, where the money in your pocket today buys less than it did yesterday, and recession , which occurs when there are two or more consecutive quarters of economic decline. The functionalist would say to let market forces fluctuate in a cycle through these stages. In reality, to control the risk of an economic depression (a sustained recession across several economic sectors), the U.S. government will often adjust interest rates to encourage more lending—and consequently more spending. In short, letting the natural cycle fluctuate is not a gamble most governments are willing to take.

Conflict Perspective

For a conflict perspective theorist, the economy is not a source of stability for society. Instead, the economy reflects and reproduces economic inequality, particularly in a capitalist marketplace. The conflict perspective is classically Marxist, with the bourgeoisie (ruling class) accumulating wealth and power by exploiting and perhaps oppressing the proletariat (workers), and regulating those who cannot work (the aged, the infirm) into the great mass of unemployed (Marx and Engels 1848). From the symbolic (though probably made up) statement of Marie Antoinette, who purportedly said, “Let them eat cake” when told that the peasants were starving, to the Occupy Wall Street movement that began during the Great Recession, the sense of inequity is almost unchanged. Conflict theorists believe wealth is concentrated in the hands of those who do not deserve it. As of 2010, 20 percent of Americans owned 90 percent of U.S. wealth (Domhoff 2014). While the inequality might not be as extreme as in pre-revolutionary France, it is enough to make many believe that the United States is not the meritocracy it seems to be.

Symbolic Interactionist Perspective

Those working in the symbolic interaction perspective take a microanalytical view of society. They focus on the way reality is socially constructed through day-to-day interaction and how society is composed of people communicating based on a shared understanding of symbols.

One important symbolic interactionist concept related to work and the economy is career inheritance . This concept means simply that children tend to enter the same or similar occupation as their parents, which is a correlation that has been demonstrated in research studies (Antony 1998). For example, the children of police officers learn the norms and values that will help them succeed in law enforcement, and since they have a model career path to follow, they may find law enforcement even more attractive. Related to career inheritance is career socialization—learning the norms and values of a particular job.

Finally, a symbolic interactionist might study what contributes to job satisfaction. Melvin Kohn and his fellow researchers (1990) determined that workers were most likely to be happy when they believed they controlled some part of their work, when they felt they were part of the decision-making processes associated with their work, when they have freedom from surveillance, and when they felt integral to the outcome of their work. Sunyal, Sunyal, and Yasin (2011) found that a greater sense of vulnerability to stress, the more stress experienced by a worker, and a greater amount of perceived risk consistently predicted a lower worker job satisfaction.

Short Answer

Self-Check: Economic Systems

You’ll have more success on the Self-Check, if you’ve completed the four Readings in this section.

Atlas of Public Management

Convergence Theory

… a core concept in Policy Analysis and Process and Atlas101

Concept description

Ashley Crossman (reference below) describes convergence theory as the presumption that “as nations move from the early stages of industrialization toward becoming fully industrialized, they begin to resemble other industrialized societies in terms of societal norms and technology.”

She writes:

“The characteristics of these nations effectively converge. Eventually and ultimately, this could lead to a unified global culture, if nothing impeded the process.

“Convergence theory has its roots in the functionalist perspective of economics which assumes that societies have certain requirements that must be met if they are to survive and operate effectively.

“Convergence theory became popular in the 1960s when it was formulated by the University of California, Berkeley Professor of Economics Clark Kerr. Some theorists have since expounded upon Kerr’s original premise with the opinion that industrialized nations may become more alike in some ways than in others. Convergence theory is not an across-the-board transformation because although technologies may be shared, it’s not as likely that more fundamental aspects of life such as religion and politics would necessarily converge, though they may.

“Convergence theory is also sometimes referred to as the “catch-up effect.” When technology is introduced to nations still in the early stages of industrialization, money from other nations may pour in to develop and take advantage of this opportunity. These nations may become more accessible and susceptible to international markets. This allows them to “catch up” with more advanced nations.

“Convergence theory is especially important in public policy as many nations join multinational governance structures and follow best practices such as those established by the OECD.”

Atlas topic, subject, and course

Problem Definition and Agenda Setting (core topic) in Policy Analysis and Process  and Atlas101 Policy Analysis and Process .

Ashley Crossman (2017). What is Convergence Theory? How Convergence Affects Developing Nations,” ThoughtCo, at https://www.thoughtco.com/convergence-theory-3026158 , accessed 4 September 2018.

Page created by: Alec Wreford and Ian Clark, last modified 4 September 2018.

Image:  Quora, Does the Convergence theory in economics actually work in real life or is it essentially just a theory? at https://www.quora.com/Does-the-Convergence-theory-in-economics-actually-work-in-real-life-or-is-it-essentially-just-a-theory , accessed 4 September 2018.

Ifioque.com official logo

Convergence Theory

Convergence theory: an explanation of psychology of the individual in crowds.

Many explanations of collective behavior, rather than considering the processes that transform a wide variety of people so that they will act similarly, suggest that the members of the collective may have been similar to one another from the very start—that it was their similarities that prompted them to join the collective in the first place.

For example, if a crowd becomes violent (a mob or riot), convergence theory would argue that this is not because the crowd encouraged violence but rather because people who wanted to become violent came together in the crowd.

Convergence theory proposes that individuals who join rallies, riots, movements, crusades, and the like all possess particular personal characteristics that influence their group-seeking tendencies. Such aggregations are not haphazard gatherings of dissimilar strangers; rather, they represent the convergence of people with compatible needs, desires, motivations, and emotions.

By joining in the group, the individual makes possible the satisfaction of these needs, and the crowd situation serves as a trigger for the spontaneous release of previously controlled behaviors. As Eric Hoffer (1951) wrote, “All movements, however different in doctrine and aspiration, draw their early adherents from the same types of humanity; they all appeal to the same types of mind” (p. 9).

Early conceptions of crowds, which portrayed their members as less intelligent, more easily influenced, more impulsive, and more violent, have not received consistent empirical support (Martin, 1920; Meerloo, 1950). Participants in mobs—particularly in connection with sports—tend to be younger men who have engaged in aggressive crowd activities in the past (Arms & Russell, 1997).

People who join radical religious groups are usually teenagers or young adults, and although they tend to be more idealistic and open to new experiences, and higher in psychological dependency, they show no signs of psychological disturbance (Bromley, 1985; Levine, 1984; Walsh, Russell, & Wells, 1995).

Convergence theory , with its emphasis on the distinctive characteristics of the individuals who seek out membership in a collective, explains why only some people take part in social movements  Opens in new window .

The Ultimate Managed Hosting Platform

Criticism of Convergence Theory

The primary criticism of convergence theory is that there is a tendency for people to do things in a crowd that they would not do on their own.

Crowds have an anonymizing effect on people, leading them to engage in sometimes outlandish behavior. Thus, while some crowds may result from like-minded individuals coming together to act collectively (e.g., political rally), some crowds actually spur individuals into behavior that they would otherwise not engage in.

The Ultimate Managed Hosting Platform

See related concept:

Book cover

A Sociology of Industrialisation: an introduction pp 127–145 Cite as

Convergence Theories

50 Accesses

Part of the Macmillan Business Management and Administration Series book series

There has been much theorising about the nature of the industrialisation process and many attempts to abstract sets of core principles which explain the conditions for the development of industrial society. In this chapter we are going to examine some variants of one approach to the process of industrialisation: this approach has been called the convergence hypothesis. The basic idea of all theories of convergence is that industrialism brings with it certain inevitable changes in the way that social life is organised and imposes common patterns of social behaviour on societies that embark on the path to becoming ‘industrial societies’. This can be oversimplified: all societies that industrialise converge, or tend to become alike.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution .

Unable to display preview.  Download preview PDF.

Suggested Further Reading

Giddens, A. (1973) The Class Structure of Advanced Societies , chaps. 8, 9, 14 (London: Hutchinson).

Google Scholar  

Kerr, C., Dunlop, J. T., Harbison, F., and Myers, C. A. (1973) Industrialism and Industrial Man , 2nd ed., postscript (Harmondsworth, Middx: Penguin Books).

Kumar, K. (1977) ‘Continuities and Discontinuities in the Development of Industrial Societies’, in R. Scase (ed.) Industrial Society: Class, Cleavage and Control (London: Allen & Unwin).


Bell, D. (1960) The End of Ideology (New York: Free Press).

— (1974) The Coming of Post Industrial Society (London: Heinemann).

Dahrendorf, R. (1959) Class and Class Conflict (Stanford: Stanford University Press).

Dore, R. (1973) British Factory — Japanese Factory (London: Allen & Unwin).

Feldman, A. S., and Moore, W. E. (1969) ‘Industrialisation and Industrialism: Convergence and Differentiation’, in W. A. Faunce and W. H. Form (eds.) Comparative Perspectives on Industrial Society , pp. 55–71 (Boston: Little, Brown).

Frank, A. G. (1971) Capitalism and Underdevelopment in Latin America (Harmondsworth, Middx: Penguin Books).

Ross, G. (1974) ‘The Second Coming of Daniel Bell’, in The Socialist Register 1974 (London: Merlin Press).

Stinchcombe, A. (1965) ‘Social Structure and Organisation’, in J. G. March (ed.) Handbook of Organizations (Chicago: Rand McNally).

Touraine, A. (1974) The Post-Industrial Society (London: Wildwood House).

Download references

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Copyright information

© 1978 David Brown and Michael J. Harrison

About this chapter

Cite this chapter.

Brown, D., Harrison, M.J. (1978). Convergence Theories. In: A Sociology of Industrialisation: an introduction. Macmillan Business Management and Administration Series. Palgrave, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-15924-6_8

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-15924-6_8

Publisher Name : Palgrave, London

Print ISBN : 978-0-333-23559-1

Online ISBN : 978-1-349-15924-6

eBook Packages : Palgrave Social & Cultural Studies Collection Social Sciences (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Health and Medical Blog

Convergence Theory Sociology Explained

In the convergence theory, the influences of a crowd do not encourage or dictate the actions of a person. Instead, the behavior of the crowd is already a reflection of how a person thinks or feels. It becomes a reflection of the combined attitudes of the individuals who have joined the crowd. Once those attitudes converge, behavior becomes a consequence.

Convergence theory is therefore an outward expression of who a person happens to be on any ordinary day. There will always be individuals within a crowd that may feel emboldened to do something they normally wouldn’t do on their own, but that attitude would still be an expression of their attitudes and desires.

This theory was first proposed in the 1960s by Clark Kerr, who was the Professor of Economics at UC-Berkeley. Ideas about convergence theory have been added to the theory since by others, including how nations converge together based on like-minded ideas just like people do to form a crowd.

Why Do Some Crowds Inspire Behavioral Changes?

The primary critique of the convergence theory in sociology is that some crowds bring like-minded people together, but other crowds inspire people to do things that they normally wouldn’t do. Behavioral changes occur in some crowds, but not others, because at the core of the individual, there is a desire to have some level of acceptance.

This need to have acceptance can also be seen at the nation-state level.

Some crowds perform group functions because of the social connections which form within them. If a group of people decide that they hate squirrels, then this hate becomes the social connection which binds them together. They will feel accepted by one another and this will cause them to work together to perform actions that are likely detrimental to the squirrels.

Some crowds inspire individuals to act in a way they normally would not because the individual feels a need to “over-perform” to find acceptance. The group and the individual have similar thoughts or ideas, but the individual does not feel the same level of social acceptance that others experience. That creates the need to perform an “impact behavior” as evidence of the individual’s sincerity.

In this instance, the individual looking to make an impact might go into town and break the window of a squirrel-related business. They might burn signs or flags that depict squirrels. You might even find them with a megaphone chanting anti-squirrel slogans. It’s done because there is an underlying hate of squirrels, which is mixed with an underlying need to feel accepted.

Why Do Like-Minded People Band Together into Crowds?

In the United States, there are fewer “open” Congressional seats today than ever before in the history of our country. One political party is almost guaranteed to consistently win specific districts in every state. Part of this is due to district redrawing to gain a political advantage, but the elements of convergence theory are in play as well.

People in the US are moving into neighborhoods with others that have similar thoughts and beliefs. Countries form treaties with others that have similar thoughts and beliefs. That reduces the variety of opinions, creates a stronger foundation for acceptance, and creates consistency along multiple spectrums of thought.

Like-minded people band together into crowds because it is comfortable for them to do so. There is no need to defend the basis of an opinion when everyone in the crowd shares the same opinion. People feel like they can be “right” without needing to put in the research it takes to prove they are correct.

So, why do some crowds turn violent and other crowds stay peaceful? The convergence theory in sociology would say that certain crowds are violent because the people who formed the crowd wanted to promote violence in the first place. Even if an individual in the crowd goes “over the top” and commits a heinously violent act on their own, the urge to do so was because of a gathering of people who appreciated the violence.

The individual seeking group acceptance wouldn’t be violent if the crowd would reject them because of their violence.

When we can recognize the composition of a crowd, then we can predict what actions the crowd might take. That allows us to recognize if we want to be part of it or if we want to disassociate ourselves from it.

There will always be individuals who fall outside of this spectrum, as there will be countries who chart their own course. With convergence theory, however, there will always be a desire to remain comfortable.


  1. 👍 Convergence theory examples. Convergence Theory Sociology Explained. 2019-02-28

    convergence theory sociology

  2. Symbolic Convergence Theory Strengths & Weaknesses, Example

    convergence theory sociology

  3. Convergence Theory

    convergence theory sociology

  4. Convergence Theory Sociology Explained

    convergence theory sociology

  5. Evolution and Qualitative Sociology

    convergence theory sociology

  6. 👍 Convergence theory examples. Convergence Theory Sociology Explained. 2019-02-28

    convergence theory sociology


  1. CG&SA lecture 5 2 Critique of Convergence Theory

  2. Contingency Theory

  3. Institutionalism: One of the Dominant theories and Ideas in Social Sciences

  4. SOC603_Topic132

  5. Summation on infinite sets (Part 6, Tao)

  6. Lecture 16: Convexity


  1. What Are the Three Theories of Sociology?

    The three theories of sociology are symbolic interaction theory, conflict theory and functionalist theory. Sociologists analyze social phenomena at different levels and from different perspectives.

  2. What Are Sociological Factors?

    Social factors are the aspects that directly influence or affect lifestyles. Some important social factors include: religion, ethnicity, family, physical status, economic status, education, location, life partners, children and political sy...

  3. What Is Interactional Theory?

    Interactional theory asserts that different factors during childhood, adolescence and adulthood compel a person into delinquency. Interactional theory was put forward by Terence P. Thornberry in 1987.

  4. Convergence Theory

    Convergence theory states that as nations move toward becoming fully industrialized, they begin to resemble each other economically and in

  5. What is convergence theory in sociology?

    The convergence theory is the one which postulates that all the societies as they move from the early industrial development to complete industrialization

  6. Convergence Theories

    CONVERGENCE THEORIESThe idea that societies move toward a condition of similarity—that they converge in one or more respects—is a common feature of various

  7. Convergence Theory Economics & Examples

    On the sociology side of the convergence theory, it describes the situation where highly industrialized nations begin to share cultural traits

  8. convergence theory

    a conceptual analysis of collective behavior that assumes that mobs, social movements, and other forms of mass action occur when individuals with similar needs

  9. Reading: Theoretical Perspectives on Economics

    Convergence theory explains that as a country's economy grows, its societal organization changes to become more like that of an industrialized society. Rather

  10. Convergence Theory

    Ashley Crossman (reference below) describes convergence theory as the presumption that “as nations move from the early stages of

  11. Convergence Theory of Crowd Psychology

    Convergence theory proposes that individuals who join rallies, riots, movements, crusades, and the like all possess particular personal characteristics that

  12. Convergence Theories

    The basic idea of all theories of convergence is that industrialism brings with it certain inevitable changes in the way that social life is organised and


    Because almost all immigrants of the past 50 years arrived as minorities in a sociological.

  14. Convergence Theory Sociology Explained

    In the convergence theory, the influences of a crowd do not encourage or dictate the actions of a person. Instead, the behavior of the crowd is already a