INFLUENCE, POWER AND AUTHORITY

Meaning and types, characteristic of power, distribution of power, various theories of political elites,  and authority- different ways acquiring legitimacy.

INFLUENCE

Ability to change the course, somebody’s thinking, behaving even in decision making are the one kind of influence. Influence has impact on the other and it is a interpersonal between the individual, groups, organization, association etc. The influence cannot be a personal to one and can be intentional or unintentional. Influence of other intention assumed.

Factor affects influence

•          Amount of recourses of your disposal
•          The manner in which you use your resources.
•          The level of motivation to use resources.

Types of influences

•          Spontaneous
•          Coercive force

POWER

Power is to possess a capacity to influence the other. It can be positive or negative. It is a capacity to control. It is a capacity to direct the course action. All form of relationship use power. In politics the ‘power’ is legitimate and authoritarian and its institutionalize defined by Niccollo Machieavalli.

The concept of power and politics are entwined interdependent in the sense that are interconnected with each other.

Meaning of Power

• The term ‘power’ may be defined as a capacity to exert an influence over others ‘power is define as the ability to influence and control anything that is of value to others. According to P.Robbins “power is the probability that one actor within the relationship will be in a position to carry out his own will despite resistance.”
• According to T.B Bottomore “Ability of an individual or a social group to pursue a course of action to make and implement decisions and more broadly to determine the agenda for decision making, if necessary against the interests and even  against the opposition of other individuals and groups.”

Definition of Power

• Giddens defines “By power is meant the ability of individual or groups to make their own concerns or interests count, even where others resist, power sometimes involves the direct use of force, but is almost always also accompanied by the development of ideas (ideology) which justify the action of the powerful.
• Max Weber defines “ Power is the probability that one actor within a social relationship will be in a position to carry out his will despite resistance, regardless of the basis on which this probability resist.’

With Power You Can..

•          Intercede favourably on behalf of someone in trouble.
•          Get a desirable project done and obtain favour.
•          Get items on and off agendas.
•          Maintains regular, frequent contact with decision makers.
•          Acquire early information about decisions and policy shift.

Characteristics of Power

There are following characteristics

•          Power is relational- power is exercised only in relation to others. Political power is essentially relational. It is over something.
•          Power is behavioural- consists in the behavioural of the two actors towards one another. Actor manifest behavior affects another actor’s manifest behavior.
•          Power is situational- it is always related to a specific situation. Power is exercised in a specific context, out of context, it become ineffective.

Types of Power

1. Political power: control of or influence on, the state ability to make or influence political decision.    
2. Economic power: control of economic assets
3. Military power: ability to wage a war

In other types of Power are

1. Coercive power: this kind of power involves the usage of threat to make people do what one desires.
2.  Reward power: as the name suggests, this type of power uses rewards, perks, new projects or training opportunities, better roles and monetary benefits to influence people.   
3.  Legislative power: this power emanate from an official position held by someone, be it in an organization, bureaucracy or government etc. The duration of this power is short lived as a person can use it only till the time he/she holds that position as well as the scope of the power is small as it was strictly defined by the position held.

POWER, AUTHORITY AND LEGITIMACY

In the words of Robert A Dahak “power influence and authority are common place words that ordinary people share with political practioners and political theorist. One hears of power to govern, the power of purse, political power, spiritual power, economic power, national power, judicial power, presidential power, black power, student power and state power.

Power is central to the study of politics. Politics is nothing but struggle for power. We cannot separate power from the study of politics. All states possess power which is the most important and essential element of the state. No state system can work in the absence of power. Political power is not evenly distributed. It is usually concentrated in the hands of a few who may be called “the power elites”.

Meaning of power

According to Herbert Goldhamer and Edward Shills “ Power is ability to influence the behavior of others in accordance with one’s own ends”. By power we mean the power of man over the minds and actions of other man.

Characteristics of Power

There are certain characteristics of power are the capacity to influence the behavior of others. An individual or a nation wields power to the extent he is capable of changing others behavior according to his with power is the capacity of an individual to get things done from others according to his desires.

According to Frederick “power is a certain kind of human relationship, for the use of power the presence of actor. There are different kinds of relationship.

Power is situational: it depends on situation, circumstances and position. A teacher may exercise power on his student which he is in college but not after he has left the college.

Power depends on its use: the president of India has powers but he doesn’t use them as he is merely a constitutional head.

Power must be backed by sanction: if the capacity of a person to get work done from others is devoid of coercion, that capacity or ability cannot be called power.

SOURCES OF POWER

There are many sources of power. The major source of power is knowledge which helps us to move from darkness to light. It helps us in investigation, learning, thinking and development of mind and soul. The capacity for leadership comes through knowledge. Hence, knowledge is an important source of power.

Another source of power is organization. It is a great power in itself. When people work together, their power and strength increases. Then a person enjoys the support of the leader of an organization his power increases, political parties are organized to capture power and exercise the same.

Power is the status of an individual: economic status helps a person to attain power. A rich man can put pressure even on the highest officials and individual with better resources will capture more power than other. The status of a person in the religious field is also a source of power as the followers of that religious support him.

Power is the skill if an individual: A tactful person can get more powers than others.

Power is faith or belief: power cannot be based on repression or brute force. It is necessary to win over the faith of the people also a government enjoying public faith in  more powerful than others.

Power is authority: authority means legitimate power. When a person occupies a political or legal post legitimately his power increases automatically. Authority not only adds to power but also makes it effective. When a person becomes a minister and gets the authority of a minister, he becomes more powerful than others.

Power is the mass media: like newspaper, radio and television. The owners and editors of newspapers can easily influence others and are effectively powerful.

Power is the responsibility of a person: that personality may be due to the wisdom, courage, oratory, organizational ability and capacity to take quick and proper decisions. A leader who possesses a charismatic personality is more powerful than others.

KIND OF POWER

·         Power may be legitimate or illegitimate: Legitimate power is that which is used according to the laws, constitution or the accepted traditions of the people. It may be constitutional, traditional, or charismatic, constitutional power is derived from the constitution of the country. Charismatic power is based on the personal qualities of an individual.

·         Illegitimate power is that which is exercised not according to laws, constitutions, or the accepted traditions or customs of the people. It is based on force or repression.

·         Power may be direct or indirect: when a person himself used his power, it is called direct power. When he gets it used by others or by subordinates, it is called indirect power.

·         Power which is exercised openly or explicitly: is called manifest power the police and the army are example of manifest power.

·         The power which can’t be exercised openly or clearly is called latent power such as the power of the people.

·         When a person uses his power or others who don’t have any power on him, it is called unilateral power.

·         When both sides use power for each other, it is called bilateral power.

·         When it is divided at different places, it is called decentralized power.

·         Power is decentralized in a federation. It is centralized in a unitary government. National power is always exercised by the state. It is be psychological power, economy power, or military power.

FORM OF POWER/ DISTRIBUTION OF POWER

Crespigny classifies power relationship into six categories.

1.      Coercive- A coercive relationship exists between A and B when A gets B to do what he wants by threating to make things unpleasant for B if he doesn’t comply. Basically coercive relationship implies conflict and deprivation. Over a period of time, it may come to generate voluntary behavior.

2.      Inductive- An inductive power relationship exists when A gets B to do what he wants by providing him something attractive, by offering a kind of award. By granting additional release of news print, the government may induce a newspaper not to publish a critical review.

3.      Relational- In a relational power relationship. A experts power over B or B does what A wants, not because of inducement or constraint but because B hopes or expects that A will help him if he complies or will harm him if he does not comply. The power relationship between superiors and there is usually relational because subordinates believe that they may prosper or win promotion by complying with the wisdom of the superiors.

4.      Impedimental- In the case of impedimental power. A gets B to company with his wishes by putting impediments or obstacles in the attainment of his goal. A minister may prevent contractors from doing his building work by withdrawing the ‘no objection’ certification.

5.      Attachment- A power relational in which A exercises power over B because the latter loves or is impressed or attracted by his personality and desires to imitate or obey him is called attachment power. No conflict or tension is involved as power is willingly conceded by B do A the power of a charismatic leader is generally of this king.

6.      Persuasive power relationship- Persuading power is that power which may be exercised by A over B and which is based on rational or nor national arguments. There is no conflict or tension in this power relationship.

7.      Legitimate power relationship- There is a legitimate power relationship. When A affects the action of B because B regards him entitled to do so. Legitimate power must be exercised by a person authorized by a set of rules to do certain things or issue certain commands. A exercise legitimate power over B only when B feels that the action of A is just and he is authorized to act by a set or system of rules.

VARIOUS THEORIES OF POLITICAL ELITES.

Pluralist theories of Power

According to this theory, power is held by a variety of groups in society (some of which are more powerful than others) who tend to compete with each other. Here, no one group or class will be able to dominate all other groups because of checks and balances built into the system of government. A ‘plurality’ of competing interest groups political parties and so forth is seen to characterize democratic societies.

Diagrammatic representation of pluralist theories of power

CONFLICT THEORIES/ RULING THEORIES

Power is unevenly distributed between capitalist and labourer or between powerful people and powerless people. Power is concentrated in the hands of capitalist. Their economic power them political power.

Some of the important aspects of Karl Marx view on ruling class theory

According to Marx, the political structures are mere reflection of the economic structure. The political power is unequally distributed in a society and there is a polarization of the society based on the accessibility to, and ownership of the means of production. The ruling classes, who own the modes of production, do control the political power too. The Marxist view envisages a classless egalitarian future in which the ruled masses capture the power from the ruling class and form a communist state.

The theories of Pareto, Mosca and Mitchel challenged some of the important aspects of the Marxist position on the formation of political elites.

·         They rejected the Marxist position that political structures are mere reflections of the socio-economic relations. Although they agreed that the economic factors are important, they believed that economic factors are not the only source determining the power structure of a society. According to them the sources of the political elites are many and the political means at their disposals are extremely important with which they could control, accommodate and even counteract the economic force.

·         While they agreed with Marx that the political power is unevenly distributed in a society, they discard the Marxist idea of the inaccessibility of the ‘ruling class’ for the ‘ruled class’ leading to the polarization between them. Instead, they believed in the ‘continual circulation’ of elites. They argued that although the elites class remained distinct from others yet, it has to remain accessible to the influence of the non-elite class since the former has to recruit new personal from the later in order to retain its power position. Unlike Marx, they also reject the possibility of the formation of a stable and closed ruling class.

·         Thirdly they find no validity in the Marxist idea of the future ‘classes’ ‘egalitarian’ society. They accept the hierarchical structure of the society as the inevitable order of any social system.

ELITE THEORY

The word ‘elite’ originated in the 17^th century and was used to refer to commodities of excellence. Later it came to be used for superior groups of people. Elite are groups of people with the highest capacities in their branch of activity. Elites are the most important leaders who perform key roles in the governance of a society. A part from making decisions, they also influence the decision making at the national and international levels.

ARGUMENTS OF ELITE THEORY

•        All are not equally capable of participating in the affairs of the state.
•       Whatever be the form of government, it is run by a small number of people.
•        Political power tends to be concentrated in a c\small, distinct and powerful groups.
•       They exclude the masses from decision making.
•       They assume that the masses are politically apathetic, passive and ill-informed.
•        Their legitimacy in derived from their ability to lead, their outstanding qualities etc.

CLASSICAL ELITE THEORY

The basic arguments of elite theory is ‘power is always rests in the hands of few’. The grand theory of elites that have emerged in Italy could be classified into categories based upon their approaches. They are

1.      Organizational approach (Mosca, Michaels)

2.      Psychological approach (Pareto)

3.      Economic approach (Burnham)

4.      Institutional approach (C.W.Mills)

VILFREDO PARETO (psychological approach)

Pareto argued that all societies were divided into those who exhibited qualities of excellence in their given sphere of activities like

•          The elite (Foxes)
•          Non elites (Lion)

Elites were simply those people who occupied in any kind of human activity. So it is a aspect of government such as political parties, trade unions, commerce, the military etc. the top people constituted in ‘governing elite’.

Non elite- in areas of life non related to government, that is occupation, entertainment, sport and leisure the top people formed non governing elites. The governing elite was constituted by those with the best developed skills at ruling others, whether by the use of force or by cunning, manipulation and healing and dealing. The masses, by contrast were incompetent and ineffectively organized. In any case, mass and majority rule were held by Pareto a delusion. According to Pareto, the composition of elites obviously changes over time there is ‘circulation of elites’ but elite rule remains.

Circulation Of Elites (based on Residue)

Divided elites into two

Lion- Achieve power because of their ability to take direct incisive action and rule by force. They are endowed with the residues called persistence and aggregates. Lion are solid, conservative prefer to relay on force.

Foxes- Rules by cunningness, diplomatic manipulation and dealing, governed by residue of combinations. The elites are composed of either of these type of individuals. History reveals a constant alternation between lions and foxes.

Circulation of elites may take place between the elite and non-elite also. Either through a gradual process of infiltration or by a violent revolution, when elites don’t possess the residues necessary for keeping them in power their rule will face threats. At all same time at the lower strata of society the necessary residue may sufficiently be manifest. Declining elites recruits the new elements from lower strata or violently over thrown.

GAETANO MOSCA (Organizational approach)

He is born in April 1^st 1858 and died in November 8^th 1941. He is a Italian political scientist, journalist, and public servant. He talk about “the ruling class” theory.

Ruling Class

Elites are the political class or the ruling class. They are superior class due to certain attributes like economic, military or religious strength. They are less in number. They perform all political functions, monopolies power. They enjoys the benefits of power.

Class of the Ruled

They are in numerous in number. They are constantly controlled, directed by legal means and manipulated.

Political Formula

Elites are capable of high level of solidarity, conscious and cohesive actions, and superior internal organizational ability. Elites exercise their rule through a political formula. A part from physical force they also try to convince the ruled class of their necessity and importance. Provide a moral and legal basis for their power. Justify their rule through a universal moral principle which are at times mythical.

Fusion of the old and the New

Position of the political class is never permanent. Their will likely to be affected by the growth of new interests/problems/ideals etc. economic changes, emergence of new religious ideology will affect the influence of elites. In such situations elites will compromise, assimilate and adapt themselves to the new changes. Fusion of the old and the new will take place. The elite will accommodate the ablest from the new groups into its fold. Sub elites (civil servants, managers of industries) are vital elements in the governance of the society in stability depends.

ROBERT MICHELS (Organizational approach)

He is a German sociologist, born 1876 and died 1936. He formulated the famous “iron law of oligarchy”.

This states “who says organization, says oligarchy”. Oligarchy means the rule by few.

Michel’s’ View

In his view, very structure of modern organized societies gives birth to elite rule. In virtue of the size and the complexity requires power and supremacy be given to a few. Michels gives two explanations to the emergence of oligarchy.

•          Organizational
•          Psychological

Organization require technical expertise which the general masses are incapable  of providing because of this technical indispensability a circle of leaders with technical know-how assume leadership responsibilities- control the affairs and thus assumes power.

POTENTIAL OF ELITES

• Technical expertise used to perpetuates itself.
•  General use of ethical principle
• Their fidelity, dedication and financial independence
• Ability of the oligarchy to absorb and digest new individuals from the masses.
• They require freedom of action and vested interest in their position and then oligarchy is established.
•  Control of the affairs are passed onto these few elites

Psychological

Majority is apathetic, ignorant, lack self-regulation and is slavish. They have psychological need for guidance, too glad to be guided and allowed others to assume political responsibilities for them. Elite take full advantage of this and perpetuate themselves in power. They become stable and irreplaceable new elements will be accepted and amalgamated. Masses can revolt but the leaders the masses become the neo-elites.

C. WRIGHT MILLS (institutional approach)

Mills applied these findings in the national level in the United States and argued in his “the power elite” that the United States was governed by a set of interlocking and self-perpetuating elites, a “power elite”. He viewed it as a fairly recent development in the United States and explained elite rule in institutional rather than psychological terms. Example- some institutions are powerful like business, media, entertainment, economic, politics, religious etc. from this some occupy a commanding position.

Elites

Elites are those who controlled such institutions. They hold the balance of power in such a society as a whole. Their influence on politics naturally will be high. They can also dominate politically on the structural level of power. Thus power gets institutionalized. They can called power elites or political elites.

Elites in USA

 Mills sighed out three main institutions. Government, business corporations and military and contended that the occupants of the top positions in these areas form the ‘power elite’. The three major elites in American society economic elite, are in a position to take fundamental and far reaching decisions on American social, economic and political policy.

Power elites in USA

Mills considered those three major elites to be the most powerful like economic elites, political elites and military elites. They are the ultimate decision making body on the highest position. It influence the American on social, political and economic life.

Dynamics of power elites

Leader of these groups are cohesive because of their similarity of social origin as well as their close interconnections. There is a degree of necessary co-operation between elites within these power blocks. May have different specific interests but these are subjected to the wider interest of maintaining elite states, power and role.

Characteristics of elite’s theories

•    Political power is invariably concentrated in the hands of a few.
•   All societies are ruled by a majority who are the political elites.
•   They are powerful because of their organizing capacities.
•  Elites rule always as self-conscious, cohesive and conspirational group.
•  Power brings more power and thus elites are in a highly advantageous position.

Criticisms of Elite Theories

•  Elite theorists confuse between potential controls with actual control, group having weak unity.
•  Political power is unevenly distributed but this doesn’t mean elite rule.
• There may be different scopes of power. A group having influence in one scope of power may not have similar degree of influence in another scope.

AUTHORITY

·   The term ‘authority’ refers to an abstract concept with both sociological and psychological components.

·         Power is the ability, whether personal or social, to get things done- either to enforce one’s own will or to enforce the collective will of some group over others.

·         Legitimacy is a socially constructed and psychologically accepted right to exercise power.

AUTHORITY AND COERCION

·         The starting point for Weber’s political analysis was the important distinction.

·         Between power as authority and power as coercion.

·         For Weber, authority is the legitimate use of power, individuals accept and act upon orders that are given to them because they believe that to do so is right.

·         In coercion, on the other hand, other force people into an action, often by the threat of violence, and this are always regarded as illegitimate.

LEGITIMATE AND POWER

·         Legitimacy means the willing to obey a system of rule or commands.

·         A person can have legitimacy but no actual power. (ex the legitimate king might reside in exile, destitute and forgotten)

·         A person can have  actual power but not legitimacy ( a dictator who exiled the king and appropriates the symbols of office)

AUTHORITY

According to Max Weber there are distinguished three main types of authority.

• 1    Traditional authority
• 2    Rational or legal authority
• 3    Charismatic authority

TRADITIONAL AUTHORITY

Of all the legitimating of authority the appeal to tradition is certainly the most common powers is legitimized by ancient customs. The authority of the ruler is generally founded on unwritten laws and it has almost a sacred quality, tribal leaders and monarchs have always relied on traditional authority. People obey traditional authority because they have always been that way; they know that doing so in past generations has given their society order and continuity. Thus it is not tradition alone here that is at issue, rather the stability of the social order is being accepted for its own sake. Authority is inherited or simply from past tradition. Leaders are leaders because they are divine right of kings.

Characteristics of authority

•          Authority is diffuse and unbounded
•          Relationships are whole person
•          Relationships are reciprocal but asymmetrical

Advantage of authority

•          Stable and orderly
•          Flexibility, not bound by excessive rules
•          Generates strong positive associations
•          Right doesn’t get blocked by process or rules

Disadvantage of authority

•          Right seem only from leader perspective
•          Fickle
•          No ways to remove incompetent leaders
•          No room for exemplary talent to rise
•          Unlimited or unrestrained power leaves potential for abuse wide open
•          Little room for the individual

RATIONAL/ LEGAL AUTHORITY

Power is legitimized by explicit rule and procedures that define the rights and obligations of the leaders. Such rules and procedures are commonly found in a written constitution and set of laws. Authority rests on a belief in the legality of enacted rules and the right of that elevated to authority under such rules to issue commands. Authority established through a process of procedural authority, elections and government hiring processes.

Advantage of rational authority

Predictable, orderly, transparent and all are equal, relatively little chance for abuse. Protects subordinates rights.

Disadvantages of rational authority

Slow, rigid and inflexible. Impersonal, processes may overwhelm goals.

CHARISMATIC AUTHORITY

Power is legitimized by the unusual, expectational or even supernatural qualities that people attribute to particular political, religious or military leaders. Weber called this extraordinary quality ‘charisma’. Often such leaders will be seen as having supernatural powers on qualities. The leader is uniquely able to resolve grand problems. The charismatic leader is the solution. Legitimacy rests with devotion to the exceptional sanctity, heroism or exemplary character of individual persons. Followers believe leader to be infallible. Leader can command anything and follower follow the leader. Leader is superman. Leader is the answer to major problem.

Advantage of charismatic authority

·         Rapid change is possible

·         Old, corrupt systems can be overthrown

·         A new world is possible

·         May really solve major problems.

Disadvantage of charismatic authority

•          If leader is an idiot and everything crashes
•          Leader abuses authority, then followers are victimized
•          Leader usually very jealous of subordinate leaders
•          Leader resist routinisation
•          Collapse at leaders demise or dead

CONCLUSION

These diverse types of authority interact differently in the process of social change. According to weber, the only kind of authority that can instigate social change is charismatic. Traditional and rational legal authority brings social stability. They are each designed to maintain the system. Charismatic individual come to bring social change, yet charismatic authority is also inherently precarious. Because charisma is based on belief in the special abilities of the individuals every instance of charismatic authority will fail within that person.