And since effective explanations will cause people to change their patterns of behavior, the process will always go on. Sociologists, or at least the people who claim the right to study and explain the system, will never be out of work, for the system is ever changing. Another way to look at this is to say that Giddens described an auto-poietic learning system, one that maintains itself by rules, and procedures for inventing new rules when needed, and which considers the problems that some people have with the rules in the system. In this model the sociologist helps understand the problems, clarifies alternatives that will work, and the problems over time disappear, or, more accurately, change. Then we have to study the problems again and seek viable alternatives that will work to lessen the problems.
Engineers call it feedback and system correction.
Habermas objected to Luchman's model because it failed to listen to and study the problems for correction and more effective results. Habermas called that a non-learning system. Before affirmative action lots of people couldn't get through the ceiling. It wasn't even glass. They just never got a chance to go to some schools, to go into some jobs, to go where their skills and abilities might have otherwise taken them.