- Max Weber, , defined power as the “probability that one actor within a social relationship will be in a position to carry out his own will despite resistance, regardless of the basis on which this probability rests.” Weber conferred, in his works, the concept of power is sociologically amorphous brought into act by an individual under demanding circumstances.
- On the other hand, Max Weber defined authority as the “probability that a command with a given content will be obeyed by a given group of persons.”
Differences
- Power and authority can be differentiated on the basis of stature of individual i.e. association of power is related to personal features of individual whereas association of authority is to social status of the individual.
- Power and authority can be exercised by a individual either in a positive or negative way. Adolf Hitler (1889-1945) can be looked upon as a tyrant ruler who implemented authority and power negatively whereas Akbar the Great (1542-1605) executed his power and authority positively.
- Authority and power both are variable with milieu of the individual. A major has power and authority to command over a team of soldiers however not over entire battalion. A colonel has authority and power to question a major but later hasn’t.
- An individual can utilize his power and authority to manipulate people under his command to believe in his ideology. In a work group it’s the power of a manager to motivate his employee into doing some extra work but it’s his authority to suspend any one.
- Max Weber further terms authority as legitimate power. The fundamental characteristic of authority is domination and imposition of will by the man in power. The authority can only be exercised by an individual if he succeeds in motivating his people for submission to his commands.
From here we can estimate the complexity in the concept of power and authority. These intricate
overlapping domains of the concepts of power and authority have rendered sociologists in debate over
years.
- From the works of Dhal, Weber and Dahrendorf power can be categorized as a subset of authority. For example as Dahl says that power is what A has on B if A has authority over B to persuade B in doing what otherwise B won’t do on his own.
- Stephen Lukes has beautifully debated through different views on power and tries to bring forth the concept of power as a phenomenon depending on the thinking of man in power.
- J. A coleman derives from Lukes’s understanding of power and quotes “power is one of those concepts which inevitably involve endless disputes about their proper uses on the part of users.” Coleman further takes reference from Edward Shils’s Tradition “wherever there is organization, there will be authority and authority will become enmeshed in traditions”.
- Michels proposed that authority can be defined as the ability, inborn or attained, for exercising dominance over a set of people. As repeatedly mentioned in this article, authority,
- Roberto Michels also holds that, is a manifestation of power and is dependent on the obedience of the followers.
- Coleman presents in his article the argument Robert Bierstedt who refers to authority as “sanctioned power, institutional power” and further argues against Michels’s view and claims that that “authority is not a capacity or innate. It is relational and exists even when it is not being explicitly exercised”. Power and authority can be distinguished as per Coleman on the basis of moral of individual in command. He exemplifies a manager who would try to control people by interfering in the private lives of his subordinates; hence questioning boundaries of that define authority and power.
- Albeit, the manager has authority over the defined assignments of his subordinates however when he trespasses into their lives he delegitimizes the authority into power.
So strolling through the concept of authority and power we will provide a sequential view on both. As
per Dahl the concept of power and authority is not naïve but has been discussed since the time of Pluto
and Aristotle. He further argues that since authority and power have synonyms in every language so it
can be said that the concept of both exist in every community. It was however only after Weber’s
works that a pattern or a systematic understanding of both concepts starts to begin.
Weber (1947) categorized authority into three broad classes:
- 1. Legal authority: The legitimacy of this type of authority is dependent on the set of laws and rules written in a state and applied administratively and judicially. The examples of it can be seen in the administrative offices. The persons who behold and regulate such authority are elected through legal procedures. The authority is restricted to the stature of person and implementation of authority is dependent on the hierarchal superiors. Government offices can be sought as the best example for the rational legal authority.
- 2. Traditional authority: As the word tradition speaks for itself; this type of authority is legitimized by its ever existence in the society. It can be exemplified by the monarchy system. People belonging to this type of authority enjoy their position as they have inherited by birth. Nepotism usually gives rise to such authority i.e. a person favored by a king or ruler can pass on the attributes to his kith and kin.
- 3. Charismatic authority: This is class of authority where in a leader has intrinsic quality of cowing people into following him. Historically two perspectives can be seen in this category one is religious and other is political. Jesus Christ, Moses, Mouindeen Chisti, Gautama Buddha and Rama displayed miracles which made people to believe in them. Politically, Adolf Hitler, M.K. Gandhi and Martin Luthar King by virtue of their personal oration skills made people to follow them. In either case the followers submit themselves to their will.
- Power according to Max Weber, is the ability to of an individual or an organization to accomplish objectives with or without the help of subordinates on the objectives. As Max Weber said in his book Society and Economy “By power is meant every opportunity/possibility existing within a social relationship, which permits one to carry out one’s own will, even against resistance, and regardless of the basis on which the opportunity rests.” To dictate and emphasize on power and its source three theories have been proposed, the pluralist theory, the power-elite theory and the Marxist theory.
- Briefly, pluralism dictates the distribution of power whereas elitist and Marxist theory emphasis on concentration/ centralization of power.
Power has been categorized by John French and Bertram Raven as follows:
- 1. Legitimate Power. This type of power is related to stature of an individual. People believe in him and think of him as an ultimate authority to make any decision. For example sergeant in field, prime minister, chief executive officer of a firm etc.
- 2. Reward Power. It can be somewhat sociologically related analogously to behavioral training. Here an individual has power to reward the work Rewards can be financial, acknowledging and recognition of subordinates.
- 3. Expert Power. It is type of submission to the skills of superior. This class of power is attained by individual on the basis or his expertise in the field. For example. A new research scholar bestows a scientist with such power, because he submits to the experience and expertise of the scientist in the field. Likewise, in a hospital young doctors submit to the decision of senior specialist. . The project leader may able to exercise expert power either as a subject matter expert in the content of the project (technical knowhow) or as an expert in the context of the project: the tools practices, disciplines and rigor of effective project management.
- 4. Referent Power: Unlike others this type of power is more or less dependent on positive favoritism. Positive favoritism can be understood as the person is capable of influencing his friends, relatives, neighbors and other members of society and earn their loyalty. These motivations can be achieved by showing affection, admiration, people friendly behavior and discussing ideology rather than imposing it. Referent power can be rooted from one person liking, respecting and/or seeking approval from another and connecting with that people. An example can be Celebrities; who have referent power by which they influence and have earned respect cum loyalty from people.
- 5. Coercive Power. As is suggested by the term coercive this type of power is achieved by force. Generally it has been reported in history as negative in nature. A leader or king forces people into submitting to his will and thinking. The person in power can punish or penalize the follower for not admitting his ideology or not fulfilling assignments assigned to him. Adolf Hitler, Napoleon are the best example of this type. However it is not always negative in nature, in case of national emergency a leader can utilize force to deal with the situation. Similarly in a corporate office a manager might pressurize subordinates to achieve company goals.
French and Raven (1959) by their classification revolutionized the concept of power and structured the organizational studies. In other terms we can say that the pluralistic view of Max Weber has dominated the concept of authority by his tripartite classification; French and Raven formulized the concept of power. An argument raised by Eduardo Zambrano and Stephen Lukes on concept of authority furthers the theory of Max Weber view on authority. They add that authority is dependent on the relation between superiors and the superior and further define that a multiple perspective aspects need to be considered for better understanding the concept of authority. Richard Friedman identified a zone of comfort between ruler and follower i.e. he states that a better impact of authority is achieved when follower and ruler have common interests Ophelia Eglene et al recollect the four factor theory of Peabody (1962) “(1) legitimacy, arising from a legally established order of rights and duties; (b) position, linked to the office a person occupies with its associated powers; (c) competence, resting on an individual’s experience, skills, and knowledge of a domain; and (d) person, based on individual philosophy and style of working”. They suggest that the latter is correlated to leadership. Another key factor that has been linked to the effective leadership is decision making. Decision making is the intrinsic attribute of the individual which depends on skills, knowledge and expertise of the individual. Decision making and implementation are constrained by the power of a person and his authority.