POWER AND AUTHORITY

Research for Power and Authority



Research for Power and Authority

Introduction

The most common definition of power in the field is that power is the chance of a person or a number of persons to realize their own will in a communal action, even against the resistance of others, a definition provided by Weber, who is recognized as the “founding voice” on power in organization studies. In operational terms, this definition of power is routinely explained as 'A' doing something to 'B' to cause B to do something that 'B' would not otherwise do; in this sense, 'A' has exercised power over 'B'. In more recent times however, organization theorists and practitioners have come to realize, as Weber's broader sociological work shows, that power is much more than this common definition suggests. (Bodin, 2006, 19-64)

However authority is defined as the exercise of legitimate influence of one social actor over another. There are, of course, many ways that an actor can influence another to behave differently, and not all of them have equal claim to authority. To differentiate the term from other forms of influence, consider a simple hypothetical: Imagine that a person wielding a club forces another person to hand over his or her money and possessions. This act might be considered coercive—the exercise of brute power, which in many instances would be criminal. However, if the person with the club is a bailiff, a person occupying a legitimate role in a society, and menaces the other person in the process of repossessing goods, the act of influence may well be legitimate and constitute the exercise of authority. (Boli, 2003, 217-241)

Literature Review

Overall power was seen as a broader concept than authority, understood as a special case of power. In addressing the power several authors have taken up the definition of Max Weber, as the probability of making decisions affecting the life of another despite their resistance. To the extent that power is exercised by means of force and coercion, Weber distinguishes between the mere exercise of power and dominance relation: The concept of power is sociologically amorphous. All imaginable qualities of a man and all sorts of possible constellations can place someone in a position to impose its will on a given situation. The concept of domination is that, to be more precise and can only mean the probability that a mandate be obeyed. (Doremus, 2002, 91)

To make your power to be effective, an individual or group may appeal to the fears, physical penalties, the exercise of persuasion, manipulation or compromise the non-powerful have the "sense of duty." Depending on their bases, wrong distinguished relations that are asymmetrical which require reciprocity. Among the former are the power and handling, within the latter persuasion and authority. (Fowler, 2005, 117-119)

While the power exercised by the force has its basis in violence, manipulation is a power exercised by hiding intentions deliberate and successful effort to influence the responses of individuals or groups that is not communicated explicitly the intentions of the ...