[uf-discuss] haudio contributor

[Guillaume Lebleu]

Robert O'Rourke wrote:
> Martin McEvoy wrote:
>>
>>
>> Manu explained the differences quite nicley to me..
>>
>> A role is "what you do", where a title is "what your
>> official title is at the organization".
>>   

I concur. I would add that title has a social function that role does 
not have.

A title is inherently something issued by an entity (author, 
organization, etc.) to another entity (work of art, employee) "because 
it can", i.e. because the author owned that right b/c he created the art 
work, or the organization owned that right b/c it offered the job. It 
typically follows social codes known to the organization/community where 
it will be used.  In the case of a title issued by a U.S. business 
organization, it uses the "VP of ...", "SVP of ...", "director", etc. to 
communicates clearly the rights/responsibilities/roles of the person 
within the organization.

In other words, a title plays a social role in an organization/society. 
As a result, titles are more important in large, stratified 
organizations/societies.

A role/occupation does not play such a role. It merely describes.

Of course the two are related: you would not give someone a role and 
give them an unrelated title.

In the context of a band, I'd say that a band does not really fit the 
profile of that stratified, large organization, and the notion of title 
is not really relevant in this context.
It may be though in the case of a record company.

Guillaume