Reading memo: Goffman, Total Institutions, and burnouts in modern society

In The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life, Goffman hypothezed that an healthy institutional order shall be an emerge order from individual interaction. In Asylums, Goffman used an extreme case that does not have this charecteristics to test this idea.

In “On the Characteristics of Total Institutions,” Goffman defines a total institution as “a place of residence and work where a large number of like-situated individuals, cut off from the wider society for an appreciable period of time, together lead an enclosed, formally administered round of life” (Goffman, 1961, p. 3).

Goffman identifies four characteristics of total institutions:

1. A strict hierarchy of authority: The staff have complete control over the inmates and their daily activities. Inmates are expected to obey the staff without question, and any form of resistance is met with punishment (Goffman, 1961, p. 17).

2. A rigid schedule and daily routine: Every aspect of the inmates’ lives is controlled by a strict schedule, from when they wake up, to when they eat, work, and sleep (Goffman, 1961, p. 45).

3. A set of rules and regulations: Inmates are required to adhere to a set of rules and regulations that are enforced by the staff. Violating these rules can result in punishment, such as solitary confinement or physical restraint (Goffman, 1961, p. 55).

4. A physical separation from the outside world: Total institutions are physically isolated from the wider society, which reinforces the dependence and isolation of the inmates (Goffman, 1961, p. 7).

Goffman argues that the experience of living in a total institution can have a profound impact on an individual’s sense of self. The constant surveillance and control, along with the lack of autonomy and independence, can lead to a breakdown of the individual’s sense of identity. The isolation and regimentation of life within the institution can lead to the development of a distinct institutional culture, where social norms and values are shaped by the demands of the institution (Goffman, 1961, p. 68).

Overall, Goffman’s sub-chapter provides a detailed analysis of the characteristics and effects of total institutions, highlighting the importance of understanding the ways in which institutions shape the lives and identities of the individuals within them.

The implications of the sub-chapter are significant, as it sheds light on the effects of living within total institutions and the challenges faced by individuals in maintaining a sense of identity and autonomy.

One implication is the need to recognize the importance of individual agency and autonomy in institutional settings. Total institutions are designed to control and regulate the behavior of individuals, but this can come at the cost of their individuality and sense of self. Recognizing and valuing the individual within institutional settings is important for promoting well-being and avoiding the negative effects of institutionalization.

Another implication is the importance of understanding the dynamics of power and control within institutional settings. Total institutions are characterized by a strict hierarchy of authority and rigid regulations, which can reinforce power imbalances and limit the agency of individuals. Understanding these dynamics is essential for promoting fair and just practices within institutional settings.

Overall, Goffman’s sub-chapter highlights the importance of understanding the effects of total institutions on individuals and society, and the need to promote autonomy, individuality, and fairness within institutional settings.

Some extended thoughts

1. Applying the definition and characteristics of Total Institutions in analyzing business entities:

Total institutions is “a place of residence and work where a large number of like-situated individuals, cut off from the wider society for an appreciable period of time, together lead an enclosed, formally administered round of life” (p. 3), with four characteristics: a strict hierarchy of authority, a rigid schedule and daily routine, a set of rules and regulations, and a physical separation from the outside world. These characteristics are explored in detail and provide a framework for understanding the ways in which total institutions operate.

As we are in a post-modern world where the forms of different social institutions are significantly different than the time in the mid 20 century, institutions in other sectors, rather than the public sector as in Goffman’s analysis, may show similar patterns. I am thinking to what extend some business institutions in the capitalist system (expecially in traditional Asian societies) can be considered as such an entity or a “semi-total institution”.

2. Effects on Identity and Selfhood: Goffman argues that the experience of living in a total institution can have a profound impact on an individual’s sense of self. The constant surveillance and control, along with the lack of autonomy and independence, can lead to a breakdown of the individual’s sense of identity. The isolation and regimentation of life within the institution can lead to the development of a distinct institutional culture, where social norms and values are shaped by the demands of the institution. This follows the concept of institutionalization, which refers to the process by which individuals become acclimated to the demands and expectations of the institution. Institutionalization can result in a loss of personal agency and identity, as individuals conform to the norms and expectations of the institution.

Following the first extension, I am curious on using the total institution concept in analyzing today’s social phenomenon in work culture, for example burnout syndromes of employees in business sector’s. The example question could be whether the impact of the workplace to individual is following the pathology of the impact of Goffman’s total institution — the mental hospital to the patients.