I deserve a better grade. The idea of legal rational authority comes from the sociologist Max Weber, who also devised the idea of traditional authority and charismatic authority as a way to govern group organizations by authority, reports Babson College. When we are saying legal-rational authority, we briefly refer to the rule of law, and we tend to associate in our mind the rule of law with liberal market economies and the liberal democracies. It does not change overtime, does not facilitate social change, tends to be irrational and inconsistent, and perpetuates inspire, control and command. Weber noted that in history those ideal types of domination are always found in combinations. The bureaucracy, from the technical point of view, is the most efficient organization.
This is also very important; again, very different from a traditional organization where people could actually be incumbents of a number of positions and could draw, in fact, even incomes from a number of positions. Their influence came, in part, from their ability to advocate for what many people held as important values. The actors can ascribe legitimate validity to an order in a variety of ways. And this is again very obvious; we already covered this, the opposite, the mirror image of it. A more modern form of traditional authority is patrimonialism, which is traditional domination facilitated by an administration and military that are purely personal instruments of the master Eisenberg 1998.
In the United States, the Kennedy family, which has produced many prominent politicians, exemplifies this model. A clear hierarchy will potentially lead to an effective organization, consisting of strong and legitimate authority relations between leaders and followers. According to Weber, it is difficult for charismatic leaders to maintain their authority because followers must continue to legitimize this authority. Legal rationality and legitimacy Under rational-legal authority, legitimacy is seen as coming from a legal order and the laws that have been enacted in it see also and. According to Weber, traditional authority is a means by which inequality is created and preserved. Lawyers are loyal to lawyers, and doctors are loyal to fellow doctors, and professors have a degree of loyalty.
The aim of essay is to discuss legal rational authority commonly known as bureacracy. The sole basis of charismatic authority is the recognition or acceptance of the claims of the leader by the followers. Usually there is also some specialized training which is expected for people to occupy certain positions. That should be quite obvious. Well this is something we already kind of covered—right? Not all authority figures are police officers, elected officials or government authorities. There is a very strong sense of collegiality among lawyers, or at least supposed to be. Further, they are enforced by a government that monopolizes their enactment and the legitimate use of physical force.
The prerequisites for the modern Western state are: 1. Rational-legal leaders The majority of modern and represent this type of authority. And—this is again justice is blind—what is important is that the essence of a bureaucracy has to be a formalistic impersonality: sine ira et studio, without hatred and passion. And you may want to think about this. The right to legitimately use the physical force in its jurisdiction.
What type of authority does this example best illustrate? If you are concerned with the procedure, that is formal rationality. This authority is only granted leaders if followers find his or her authority legitimate. Similarly, a leader or government can start out exemplifying one type of authority and gradually evolve or change into another type. If you go to a doctor for a second opinion, this doctor is really not supposed to say that his or her colleague, the other doctor, really screwed it and he gave you the wrong diagnosis or the wrong therapy. The third principle is neutrality, which this article does a good job at. The individual in authority is the one who is primary in the group, controlling certain aspects of what the other group members do and say, and perhaps even what and how they think.
But the major point what I wanted to make—right? Weber argues that an individual can exercise power in three ways: through direct physical power, by reward and punishment and by the influence of opinion. Historically, traditional authority has been the most common form among governments. Give reasons for your answer. Generally speaking, people perceive the objectives and demands of an authority figure as reasonable and beneficial, or true. Types of Authority The protesters in Tunisia and the civil rights protesters of Martin Luther King, Jr. Charismatic authority is legitimized by the personality and leadership qualities of the ruling individual. And therefore that was specifically a legal system based on substantive rationality.
Also, for him, traditional authority blocks the development of rational-legal forms of authority, a viewpoint he was particularly partial to. There are different ways how laws and norms can be established. And he also said in legal-rational authority there must be a very clear separation of spheres of competence. The majority of the modern states of the twentieth century are rational-legal authorities, according to those who use this form of classification Authority Types Traditional authority is legitimated by the sanctity of tradition. Authority, by comparison, is a quality that enhances power, rather than being itself a form of power.
If authority is to be seen legitimate, the relation between authority and followers must be balanced, so that the authority relation is accepted by the followers. In a study of charisma and religion, Riesebrodt argues that Weber also thought charisma played a strong — if not integral — role in traditional authority systems. In this form of authority, all officials are personal favorites appointed by the ruler. It high lights why legal rational authority is the best way of authority for any professional run organization. Charismatic authority is legitimized by the personality and leadership qualities of the ruling individual. The political systems of the world changed so much in the last hundred years.
The majority of the modern states of the twentieth century are rational-legal authorities, according to those who use this form of classification Authority Types Traditional authority is legitimated by the sanctity of tradition. And this is what I will go through—a number of issues. Formal rationality is that you are simply implementing the rules of the game. As a political or legal system develops in this rational manner, authority takes on a legal form. Few governments or leaders can be neatly categorized. But it was imposed by some power upon us.