Defining Success in a Changing Society: Self-Evaluation and Social Reflections of a Coming Elite in the Baltic States

Abstract

The term ‘success’ characterizes the social status of individuals and groups in a society, yet its meaning is subject to the continuous processes of reconstruction in public and academic discourse. Who is labeled successful is rapidly changing in transitional societies such as those of the Baltic states, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. In these contexts, sociologists have identified age as one of the factors influencing success or failure in society. Taking existing studies as a point of departure, this article looks into how those labeled ‘successful’ conceptualize success themselves. On the basis of in-depth interviews with individuals born between 1970 and 1978 in Estonia and Latvia and against the backdrop of theories about value formation and shifts, we come to the conclusion that the existing data provide an incomplete picture of how the emerging elite of both countries value individual performance and social status within their societies.

Keywords:

• generation
• values
• Estonia
• Latvia
• socialization
• transition
• biographies
• social mobility

Acknowledgements

The research reported in this article was supported by the European Union through the European Regional Development Fund (Center of Excellence CECT) and two Targeted Financing Grants (nos. SF0130008s07 and SF0180128s08) from the Estonian Ministry of Education and Research as well as by Estonian Science Foundation grants (no. ETF7030 and ETF7614). We would like to thank Tarja Tolonen and two anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments on an earlier draft of this article.

Notes

Notes

1 While there are numerous quantitative studies on value formation and economic performance in relation to different age cohorts in Estonia, only a few such studies have been conducted in Latvia. Though the issue of individual and social values among young people has been researched in Latvia, most of these studies rely on qualitative methods of interviewing and content analysis (Tisenkopf 1995); or they use a combination of small-n surveys and qualitative interviews (King et al. 2000; Tunne 1997). Even though some of the ‘Estonian’ studies include data from Latvia (Titma &Trapido 2002), this might still leave the impression of a certain imbalance in our empirical source base as studies based on Estonian data outnumber Latvian. However, the ‘Latvian’ studies that we refer to as well as our own research in Latvia demonstrate that similar conceptual processes are taking place among this age group in both countries. Of course there are certain differences in economic and social development, but the main trends seem similar. Thus, for our analysis of the perception of success and its theoretical contextualisation we focus on commonalities rather than differences between these two Baltic countries.

2 Some authors speak in this context even of ‘cultural trauma’ referring to the impact that the rapid changes had on personal lives, values and patterns of social behaviour (Aarelaid-Tart 2006; Sztompka 2000).

3 We are aware that due to this slightly different focus of the interviews there might be limitations in the analysis. However, since we did not find a substantial qualitative difference in the character of the answers about success, we concluded that these limitations are not likely to be significant.

4 Nils, interview, Riga, 4.4.2005.

5 Riina, interview, Tallinn, 27.4.2005.

6 Peeter, interview, Tallinn, 28.3.2005.

7 Aija, interview, Riga, 10.6.2005.

8 Dace, interview, Riga, 8.3.2005.

9 Liisa, interview, Tartu, 26.3.2005.

10 Toomas, interview, Tallinn, 2.4.2008.

11 Natalja, interview, Riga, 4.3.2005.

12 Mihkel, interview, Tallinn, 2.5.2005.

13 Kristi, interview, Tallinn, 20.3.2005.

14 Aija, interview, Riga, 10.6.2005.

15 Mart, interview, Tallinn, 15.4.2005.

16 Merike, interview, Tallinn, 22.3.2005.