What is Authority by Dr Sammy D.James

Differentiating Authority, Power, and Legitimacy.
The term “authority” refers to an abstract concept with both sociological and psychological components. As a child born of a myriad of different social situations which have some rough similarities, no easy definition exists. Of particular concern throughout the literature on the topic is the entanglement of the concepts of authority, power, and legitimacy. This is a concern not only in the abstract (by which I mean that scholars discuss and disagree on how the three are entangled), but also in the concrete because scholars themselves are often guilty of entangling them. One is defined as a function of the other and vice-versa until the reader doesn’t know where to turn anymore for help.



Power and Legitimacy
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. A person can have legitimacy but no actual power (the legitimate king might reside in exile, destitute and forgotten). A person can have actual power but not legitimacy (the usurper who exiled the king and appropriates the symbols of office).

Here, now, we begin to approach an understanding of what authority is because in all social situations a person is treated as an authority only when they have both power and legitimacy. We might consider, for example, the phrase uttered so often when someone intrudes into our business in order to give commands: “You have no authority here.

What does that mean? It might mean that the person has no legitimate claim to be heard or heeded. It might mean that the person has no social power — he has not the ability to enforce his will over the objections of others. Or, it might be both. In any event, both must be present for authority to exist (socially) and be acknowledged (psychologically).



Psychology of Authority
This is still not quite enough, however, because it defines authority a bit too closely to the concepts of legitimacy and power. When a person has authority over others, it means something a bit more than simply that they have a right to exercise existing power. The missing ingredient is psychological — the previously mentioned but not explicated issue of acknowledgment. Both power and legitimacy are social in that they exist in the interplay between two or more humans. Yet what goes on in the mind of person when he acknowledges the authority of another?

It isn’t simply that he accepts the factual existence of power or legitimacy; rather, it’s also that he accepts that an authority figure is justified in making a decision without also explaining the reason for that decision and persuading others to accept that the decision was reached properly. The importance of this is not too difficult to see.



Exercising Authority
If I have authority over you, I can expect that when I make a decision you will go along with that decision, even if I don’t take the time to explain it to you and persuade you that it is indeed right. In turn, your acceptance of me as an authority implies that you have already agreed to be persuaded, implicitly, and won’t demand explicit explanations and reasons.

Once I begin to explain my reasoning process and get you to agree that my conclusion was the proper one, then you have reached your own decision. When you act, it won’t be because of me enforcing my will over you, nor will it have anything to do with the legitimacy of my power. Instead, it will simply be you exercising your will for your own reasons.

Consider the appropriate example of a priest as a religious authority over a congregation. This priest has the legitimate social power to see that his will and that of and his superiors is enforced over the membership of the congregation. More than this, however, we must understand that those members have implicitly accepted that the priest does not need to patiently reason with each one of them in turn in order to get them to independently agree to the decisions in question.

Why doesn’t the priest explain everything? There can be many reasons — perhaps members of the congregation lack the sophisticated training necessary in order to understand them, or maybe there just isn’t enough time. What’s important is that the priest could explain things, but doesn’t — authority means not having to explain everything but being able to wield legitimate power anyway.

Only in a community of infinitely rational individuals with an infinite amount of time would it be possible for everything to be fully explained all of the time. In the real world, however, we must rely upon authority figures to make decisions for us. As a part of this, we invest them with the power and legitimacy necessary to cause those decisions to be meaningful and relevant.
They have a lack of self-confidence. • They want to avoid the pressure of addi- tional responsibility. Counsel any of your subordinates who show these signs of unwillingness. Help them overcome their fears and learn to accept authority and responsibility.
AUTHORITY AND POWER.With authority comes power. Power is the ability to influence people toward organizational objectives. However, you have limits on your authority and power. View your authority and power as a funnel, broad at the top and narrow at the bottom. Always assume you have enough authority and power to meet your obligations, but do not exceed that limit.Authority,Authority only exists when subordinates accept the idea that the supervisor has authority over them. Subordinates can fail to recognize authority through disobedience, denial, or work delays. Subordinates usually accept authority readily; however, abusing your authority as a supervisor can make you ineffective. Although most authority in the Navy results from a member’s rank or position in the chain of command, many types of authority exist. Most authority in the Navy is delegated.LINE AUTHORITY. —Line authority is the authority you have over subordinates in your chain of command. This type of authority corresponds directly to your place within the chain of command and does not exist outside the chain of command.STAFF AUTHORITY. —Staff authority is the right of staff to counsel, advise, or make recommendations to line personnel. This type of authority does not give staff the right to give line personnel orders that affect the mission of the line organization. A chief from another work center or division could, by virtue of his or her rank, exercise staff authority over a person in your work center or division by counseling or advising him or her to get a haircut. Failure to follow the advice or counsel may result in nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for the subordinate. The other chief would.not, however, have the authority to enter your work center or division and make changes that only you and your superiors have the authority to make. FUNCTIONAL AUTHORITY. —Certain staff organizations are granted functional authority to direct line units within the area of the staff's specialty. Examples of staff organizations with functional authority include the Legal, Equal Opportunity, and Safety Departments. Power In conjunction with your authority, you use power to influence others toward the accomplish- ment of command goals. You can use power for personal gain or for the good of the organization. However, if your subordinates believe you use power for personal gain, you will soon suffer an erosion of that power. On the other hand, if subordinates believe you use power to accomplish the organizational goals, your power to influence them will become stronger. Your power will also become stronger when you share it through delegation of authority. Of the six types of power—reward, coercive, legitimate, informational, referent, and expert— you may use one or more in various combinations. Each situation will determine the one or ones you use. REWARD POWER. —Reward power stems from your use of positive and negative rewards to influence subordinates. Positive rewards range from a smile or kind word to recommendations for awards. Negative rewards range from corrective- type counseling to placing a person on report. You will find one of the best ways to influence your subordinates is through the use of your reward power. As a chief, you are responsible for starting the positive reward process. First, write a recommendation for the award. Once the recommendation is typed in the command’s standard award letter format, forward it up the chain of command for approval. Your job does not end here. Always follow-up on the recommen- dation, using your influence and persuasion to get the award to the proper command level. Frequent use of positive rewards will amplify the effect of a negative reward. Give positive rewards freely, but use restraint in giving negative rewards. If you use negative rewards frequently, subordinates will begin to expect a negative reward. Their expectation of a negative reward will lessen your power.