Max Webers Concept of Political Authority - Essay Example

Max Weber’s concept of political ity (with reference to real world examples) Introduction This study reviews the concept of political ity popularized by Max Weber, an influential sociologist of the 20th century His ideals on political authority will be recalled in this essay thru the interpretations of various philosophers and authors. Purpose of the study is to find out its relevance in the current situation of bureaucratic authority set up and the concepts of Max Weber. Max Weber has authored theories of authority based on the belief system that legitimized the three theories that will be explained here. 1. Theories of authority a. Traditional authority Traditional authority has something to do with beliefs of heredity and tradition. Blau, P. (p.308) identifies the bases of authority of Weber. Blau said Weber believes that traditional authority is legitimized by the sanctity of religion. As such, it is viewed as something “sacred, eternal and inviolable”. The position of the leader is achieved through heredity and is believed to be designed to rule over the rest. By this, the people are bound to follow the leader by tradition of loyalty, personal dependence and sacred beliefs on the divine rights of the kings. The work of Henry, K (n.d.) collaborates with Blau in that traditional authority is established as a rule and the right to statute does not change over time. It has been socially accepted and considered as a “status quo”. As such, change of political authority is impractical. Weber states “The creation of new law opposite traditional norms is deemed impossible in principle.” In this instance, Weber considers traditional authority as being based on patriotism and feudalism. Weber regards patriarchal structure as “the servants are completely and personally dependent upon the lord”, while in an estate system (i.e. feudalism), “the servants are not personal servants of the lord but independent men” (Weber 1958, 4 cited by Henry, K.). Political Dictionary defines a patriarchal structure as a society wherein “authority was divine, descended from Adam through the kings of Israel to modern kings”. The word is also associated by feminists who debate on the practice of giving priority to men over women. Henry, K. gathers from Weber, a description of legitimacy of authority in traditional way is based on custom handed down from the past to present, which often times is a dictatorial process. It is accepted by subordinates and is not challenged by the individuals. This type of authority is found in spiritual, sacred religious forms, a well established culture, and family, tribal or clan type structures. Weber presupposed that the priests, clan leader, family head, or patriarchal figure are examples of dominant leaders in traditional authority. In some cases, Henry noted that traditional authority is supported by beliefs pointed to by Weber. These beliefs to myths or connection to sacred or social artifacts such as a cross, flag or social institutions are responsible for this authority. An example is the monarchy system of kings and queens in England that belong to the family system that gave them the right to the position. Dynasty rulings of sultans and emperors who ruled for generations is another example. b. Charismatic authority Much attention has been paid by other authors who commented on the theory of Weber. One of these is the study of Fagen, R. (1965) that illustrated Weber’s idea of a charismatic leader, who has the ‘gift of grace and has a certain quality of an individual personality, by virtue of which he is set apart from other individuals and treated as endowed with supernatural, superhuman, or exceptional powers or qualities”. This concept is criticized by Fagen as he states that the charismatic authority is rooted on the belief system of the followers which was anchored on Christian beliefs, and not on the transcendental qualities of the leader. Fabel said that this concept is applicable to charismatic leaders like Stalin, Hitler, and Gandhi. Today, several hosts of leaders exemplify the charismatic leaders described by Fagen like Winton Churchill, Mother Teresa Bill Clinton serving in the government, public and private sector. They are mot superhuman but have exemplary abilities to lead. Hoc Hai (2007) as differentiated from Weber, believes these leaders led people because they reached out through emotions and gained their trust so much so that followers do whatever these leaders tell them. He said these leaders are motivated by their concern of the needs of the people. They are determined to create a friendly environment and organization and believe that it will lead to an efficient work and result. Charismatic leaders are dedicated and willing “to take unconventional methods, sacrifice financial safety, financial safety, risks, devote personal time to reach their goals.” Viewed from Article of 12 Manage.com (1998) Weber defines charismatic leadership “as resting on devotion to exceptional sanctity, heroism or exemplary character of an individual person, and of the normative patterns of order or patterns revealed by him”. Weber sees charismatic leaders as those using analogies, symbols, metaphors and stories and treats these leaders as optimists, conventional rebels with light Idiosyncrasies. Now we see charismatic leaders as someone who leads organizations who have the power to drive turnabouts, launch new programs, new enterprises and inspire renewals, but is not always a guaranty of correctness, success and ethics. 2. Legal rational authority. Fagen (1965) demonstrates how Weber looks at the legal-rational authority. Weber says legal authority is legitimized by the belief in the supremacy of the law. It is based on the assumption that authority depends on the set of rules established to accomplish specific goals. Under this system, “obedience is not owed to the person, regardless of charisma or tradition, but on the basis of a set of impersonal principles”. Here, subordinates are required to follow orders of higher authority, whoever occupies the position. Development of organizations henceforth followed these principles of authority. An example is the government set up that follows hierarchy of authority done by executive agencies, armies, private and public corporations. Fagen explains that the authority of the official over his subordinates rests upon the body of laws and regulations established for the purpose. The legal rational authority has evoked bureaucracy in the system. According to Williams, D.(n.d). Webber describes the design of a bureaucracy as a set up where there is no exclusive authority structure; positions could be held by other charismatic leaders and can also be rotated. For instance, members of the Parliament can be changed; committee and administrative staff can be replaced. Henry, K. (n.d.) interpreted Weber’s legal rational authority “as a belief in the legality of patterns of standard rules and the right of those elevated to authority under such rules to issue commands” As such; the authority of the ruler is based on the “impersonal orders” and has authority to people only by virtue of his position. For instance, the power of the mayor of a municipal city is limited to the position on which he has been elected and ends when he steps down. Examples of the application of these theories in the present time Williams, D. (n.d.) applied Weber’s theory in the example of President Bush’s administration. She said, in her narratives, that the President exercised charismatic authority in invading Iraq. Bush does not have sufficient military experience, and yet he was able to convince the Americans on the need to attack Iraq. William’s writings evoked that Pres. Bush was able to gain the trust of the people on whatever was his decision on the matter. Williams also thinks that Weber’s theory on tradition has been used by Bush in his decision as the US has a long history of military invasions in many countries and this authority is stated in the American constitution. Furthermore, Williams says Bush has a persuasive ability that is based on the executive powers of his position. Much of the government policies relies on the legal authority and mandate from the U.S. Congress. If Weber is here, he would probably include persuasive authority among his notes. In the recent wage against effect of recession, President Obama used his persuasive authority to ask for support from the U.S. congress to approve his economic package. This proposal was approved without much challenge from Congress because people pin their hopes that this policy decision will bail out the Americans from the effects of the economic crunch Discussions The legal-rational authority is becoming to be the dominant authority of power being used today. Based on interpretations gathered, I conclude that traditions and charismatic leadership are slowly giving way to developments. If Max Weber is here today, he would see his theories develop in the political and economic aspects of management and leadership. As legal systems continue to be developed, more governments and economic systems are geared towards using this, but there will always be charismatic leaders whose authority will be vested on the prescribed standards. One example is President Barack Obama. According to Jacobs, T. (2009) President Barack Obama owns a charismatic characteristic that elevated him to the highest position of the land. In this paper, Obama is described as having a ‘charisma rooted in his outstanding oratorical skills, combined with his ability to distill complex ideas into simple messages with direct emotional appeal.” Development of bureaucracy There are many ways that a legal system is developed and standardized into an ideal bureaucracy system perceived by Weber. For example the political system developed by elections and political procedures are oppositions to monarchies and traditional system. Weber refers to the traditional and monarchy systems as an “iron cage”. Henry, K.(n.d.) infers to Weber’s position of legitimate authority and his definition of an ideal-type bureaucracy which is stated as follows: “incorporated hierarchy, impersonality, written rules of conduct, promotion based on achievement, specialized division of labor, and efficiency. Information flows up the chain of command and directives flow down, according to Webers model. Impersonal rules explicitly define duties, responsibilities, operating procedures, and rules of conduct.” (Henry, K. n.d.) Weber’s political system is something that is developed in a rational manner wherein authority takes place. The leaders have the legal right to rule and subordinates accept the legality of the rulers because they believe that it is their legitimate rights to do so. The leaders on the other hand, exercise these powers based on legitimacy. For example, the Chairman of the Board of a corporation exercises powers in implementing policies for the company based on the guidelines set by the Board of Directors. The President of the United States has legitimate powers based on the constitution and by virtue of his position. The design of the present political system is shown in the study of Aziz M. (2005) who quoted Weber’s idea of a leader in the legal-rational authority, wherein he said: "In democracy the people elect a leader in whom they have confidence. Then the elected leader says:’ Now shut up and obey me’. People and parties may no longer meddle in what he does" Max Weber,” (A conversation with Ludendorff recorded by Marianne Weber”) Aziz profound the idea of a traditional political authority that was present in the German politics during the time of Weber. The words of Weber convey to me an anti-democratic meaning that limits the rights of the people to challenge the authority The ideal type rarely takes place in totality in the real world, as according to Weber, the system can be challenged by subordinates. However, challenges do not change the structural system. Weber in his writings said that challenges are political power struggles that could be based on “ethnicity, nationalism but not classicism “. In this instance, in the political scene, members of the Congress could question policy decisions of President Obama regarding his economic package to end recession, or his military decisions to send U.S. army troops to war-strife torn areas. Economic challenges can come from the stakeholders that questions the decision of the President of the company over investments, failures in the company, etc. Labor unions most often challenge management’s decisions on employees’ welfare, and resort to legal battles for decision. Set up of Bureaucracy in offices Weber’s ideal bureaucratic set up is echoed in offices wherein the basis of employment and promotions are qualifications rather than status. Employees are urged to work together based on their qualification to promote the goals of the organization. Weber thinks that the ideal bureaucratic set up promotes economic growth and prosperity. The defined rule of modern bureaucracy illustrated by Weber is based on: “the principle of fixed and official jurisdictional areas, which are generally ordered by rules, that is, by laws or administrative regulations. The regular activities required for the purposes of the bureaucratically governed structure are distributed in a fixed way as official duties” (Weber, chap . 6, p. 650-78 cited by Faculties.rsu.edu) Procedural systems in different offices follow this bureaucratic principle, as upon observation, I noted that regular activities are distributed in a fixed way as official duties. Those in charge of giving orders and commands do so in accordance to the rules and done in a steady way. Coercive means are not needed for obedience of instructions. Methodological process is employed in the process of operation. Conclusion Based on the above discussions and interpretations, I could fairly conclude that the bureaucratic theory and concepts of authority authored by Max Weber has established a system of control and order that is found in the government and private structures today. The relevance of his concepts are found to be more ideal and pronounced in our present set up of democracy. w.c. 2252 References 12 Manage.com. 1998. The Tripartite Explanation of charismatic leadership of Weber and others Viewed 20 February 2010 from http://www.12manage.com/methods_weber_charismatic_leadership.html Aziz, M. 2005 Weber’s concept of Plebiscitary democracy and Liberal democracy . Viewed 19 February 2010 http://www.ulum.nl/a225.html July 2005. Blau, P. 1963. Critical Remarks on Weber’s Theory of Authority. The American Science Political Review, Vol. 57, No. 2 (Jun, 1963) pp. 305-316, American Political Science Association. Viewed 22 February 2010 URL http://.jstor.org/stsable/1952824 Faculty.rsu.edu. Max Weber, Bureaucracy. Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, part III, chap. 6, pp. 650-7 Viewed 20 February 2010 from http://www.faculty.rsu.edu/~felwell/TheoryWeb/readings/WeberBurform.html#Weber Fagen, R. 1965. Charismatic Authority and the Leadership of Fidel Castro. University of Stanford. Viewed 22 February 2010 from http://www.jstor.org/pss/444996 Henry, K. (n.d.) Legal-rational authority Viewed 20 February 2010 from http://ezinearticles.com/?Max-Webers-Typology-of-Forms-of-Authority---Traditional,-Rational-Legal,-and-Charismatic&id=507723 Hoc, H. Charismatic Leaders. Ezine Articles. Viewed 19 February 2010 from http://ezinearticles.com/?Charismatic-Leaders&id=448045: Jacobs, T 2009. Charisma + Crisis = Barack Obama, Miller McCune. Viewed 19 February 2010 from http://www.miller-mccune.com/blogs/news-blog/charisma-plus-crisis-equals-president-obama-3803/ Political Dictionary. Patriarchy. Viewed 19 February 2010 from http://www.answers.com/topic/patriarchy Williams, D. Max Weber: Traditional , Legal-Rational and Charismatic Authority. Viewed 19 February 2010 from http://danawilliams2.tripod.com/authority.html . 2. Read More