STRIKING THE BALANCE: THE DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIAL CONTROL IN CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATIONS (SELF-REGULATION, HOME OWNERS)

This study examines the development of social control in an emergent type of organization, the condominium association. It is based on data gathered in 1979 and 1980: 67 interviews with condominium owners, management personnel, developers, renters living in associations, and attorneys working for the groups who lived or worked in Chicago and surrounding suburbs; a five month case study of an association in Chicago; and a survey of 599 condominium owners living in Chicago, Houston, San Antonio, Denver, and Washington, D.C.;This research documents emergent structures, roles, and processes in the residential environment. In addition to informal neighboring, the jointly-owned property, contractual basis of membership, and formal governance structure of associations superimpose multiplex relationships on residents. Associations alter the role of the home owner in America and require trade-offs between amenities owners expect a condominium unit to provide--privacy, autonomy and maintenance-free living, and the realities of association life--responsibility for maintenance of jointly-owned property and the necessity of participation in collective governance. The study reinforces results from previous research on problems with the legitimacy of collective control emanating from self-regulation, the similarity of status among group members, and the special status of offenders, and points to the persistent perception of the rights associated with home ownership.;The system of social control in associations develops in stages according to the length of time a group has operated and owners' perceptions of the source of conflict as externally or internally induced. Organizational structure, relationships between disputants, and the nature or problems shape the selection of control mechanisms. Owners are more likely to choose a formal mechanism such as adjudication when the other party is an outsider, but use less formal, internal measures to resolve most conflicts among residents. The success of these mechanisms reflects the hierarchy of importance and legitimacy of individual and collective interests. Individual economic self-interest represented by property ownership has highest priority. The results support the theoretical premise that sufficient individual interests must be served and/or sanctions imposed for group members to support collective goals.