Weber employed a different approach of the social groups as opposed to that of Marx. Weber classified economic, social and political inform of class, status and party respectively. He regards these three as a phenomenon of the distribution of power within a society. Weber’s belief of class, status and party indicates the approach in which the material basis is related to the ideological sense. To grasp the real sense of Weber’s perception on stratification, he argues that an individual identity should not be determined by class identity, and the status and party identities often cross among class divisions.
The main argument that Davis and Moore put forward is that, stratification is aimed at placing and motivating individuals in the social structure. The fact of social inequity in the human society is determined by ubiquity and its antiquity. Each society must put individuals in social positions and motivate them to work hard. However, some positions are more functionally important than others therefore, requiring more training than others to induce their talent. Various societies place skilled and trained people in these positions so that they can be motivated to get better rewards. From this principle, the resulting stratification system is functional for the society. However, there are internal factors like the social distance between these positions and external factors like relationship to other societies that will seem to affect a society’s stratification system.
The power elite theory claims that a single elite can decide important matters like life and death issues for a whole nation while leaving minor issues for the middle level and close to nothing for the common man. Whereas, pluralists advocate for fair power sharing, the power elite school decries the unjust distribution of power. According to Mills, the