Tripartite classification of authority

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Max Weber distinguished three ideal types of political leadership, domination and authority:

  1. charismatic domination (familial and religious),
  2. traditional domination (patriarchs, patrimonalism, feudalism) and
  3. legal domination (modern law and state, bureaucracy).

These three forms of authority are said to appear in a "hierarchical development order"; states progress from charismatic authority, to traditional authority, and finally reach the state of rational-legal authority which is characteristic of a modern liberal democracy.[1]

Contents

[edit] Charismatic domination

Main article: Charismatic domination

Charismatic authority grows out of the personal charm or the strength of an individual personality. [2] It was described by Weber in a lecture as "the authority of the extraordinary and personal gift of grace (charisma)"; he distinguished it from the other forms of authority by stating "Men do not obey him [the charismatic ruler] by virtue of tradition or statute, but because they believe in him."[3] This form of authority can be seen in populist dictatorships where one individual exerts control by virtue of their personal popularity and following. Many states based on this model do not survive the death or fall from power of their original leader.

[edit] Traditional domination

Main article: Traditional domination

In traditional authority, the legitimacy of the authority comes from tradition; Weber described it as "the authority of the eternal yesterday" and identified it as the source of authority for monarchies.[4]

[edit] Legal domination

Main article: Legal domination

Legal authority, also known as legal-rational authority, is where an individual or institution exerts power by virtue of the legal office that they hold. It is the authority that demands obedience to the office rather than the office holder; Weber identified "rationally-created rules"[5] as the central feature of this form of authority. Modern democracies are examples of legal-rational regimes. People also abide by legal-rational authority because it makes sense to do so for their own good, as well as for the greater good of society.

[edit] The classification of authority in the context of history

Weber also notes that legal domination is the most advanced, and that societies evolve from having mostly traditional and charismatic authorities to mostly rational and legal ones, because the instability of charismatic authority inevitably forces it to "routinize" into a more structured form of authority. Likewise he notes that in a pure type of traditional rule, sufficient resistance to a master can lead to a "traditional revolution". Thus he alludes to an inevitable move towards a rational-legal structure of authority, utilizing a bureaucratic structure. This ties to his broader concept of rationalization by suggesting the inevitability of a move in this direction. Thus this theory can be sometimes viewed as part of the social evolutionism theory.

In traditional authority, the legitimacy of the authority comes from tradition, in charismatic authority from the personality and leadership qualities of the individual (charisma), and in legal (or rational-legal) authority from powers that are bureaucratically and legally attached to certain positions. A classic example of these three types may be found in religion: priests (traditional), Jesus (charismatic), and the Roman Catholic Church (legal-rational). Weber also conceived of these three types within his three primary modes of conflict: traditional authority within status groups, charismatic authority within class, and legal-rational authority within party organizations.

In his view every historical relation between rulers and ruled contained elements that can be analyzed on the basis of the above distinction.

[edit] References

  1. ^ http://66.102.9.104/search?q=cache:-yJWnQaQaO4J:www.usp.ac.fj/fileadmin/files/Institutes/piasdg/governance_papers/leroy__comparative_constitutionalism_solomon_islands.pdf+weber+%2B+tripartite+%2B+authority+%2B+traditional&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=37&gl=uk&safe=vss
  2. ^ Charismatic Leadership (Weber)
  3. ^ Politics as a Vocation
  4. ^ Politics as a Vocation
  5. ^ Politics as a Vocation

[edit] See also

Characteristic

Charismatic

Traditional

Legal-Rational

Type of ruler

Charismatic leader

Dominant personality

Functional superiors or bureaucratic officials

Position determined by:

Having a dynamic personality

Established tradition or routine

Legally established authority

Ruled using:

Extraordinary qualities and exceptional powers

Acquired or inherited (hereditary) qualities

Virtue of rationally established norms, decrees, and other rules and regulations

Legitimized:

Victories and success to community

Established tradition or routine

General belief in the formal correctness of these rules and those who enact them are considered a legitimized authority

Loyalty:

Interpersonalàpersonal allegiance and devotion

Based on traditional allegiances

To authority / rules

Cohesion:

Emotionaly unstable and volatile

Feeling of common purpose

Abiding by rules (see Merton’s theory of deviance)

Leadership:

Rulers and followers (disciples)

Established forms of social conduct

Rules, not rulers