While social structural analysis allows a description of complexly differentiated social structures, it has failed to develop a theory that elucidates the consequences of such structures for the production of interpersonal influences and agreements. This and other limitations of social structural analysis were noted by Komarovsky (1973) in her Presidential Address to the American Sociological Association. Boorman and White (1976) sought to address Komarovsky's concerns in their seminal paper on role structures. However, their efforts are only partially successful; in particular, they fail to present an account of the formation of agreements among actors in different social positions.

Komarovsky describes three limitations of social structural analysis. First, she suggests that social structural analysis “obscures and neglects the importance of individuality.” How does the “self” or individuality enter into a conceptualization of social structure based on social positions? Second, she suggests that social structural analysis overemphasizes “conformity and stability” and neglects “deviation, malintegration and social change.”