Typology of Authorities
Weber's Typology of Authority
Max Weber, who is also know as one of the principal architect of modern social science, also has the distinct honor of being one of the foremost social theorist in the 20th century (Kim, 2007). Weber argued that all oppressive structures and all uses of power must exist within a legitimated order which is based on a complex mixture of two kinds of legitimating factors: subjective and objective (Allan, 2005, p. 151). Underlying the subjective and objective legitimacy, in referencing authority, Weber identified three ideal types of legitimacy upon which authority rests: rational-legal, charisma and traditional (Allan, 2005, p. 152). These three were considered Weber’s typology of authority, which Weber developed to help his effort in understanding the nature of modern organizations (Tolbert & Hall, 2009, p. 70). Weber’s typology of authority distinguishes the basis of a mixture of ways power may be exercised in any society or institution (Shortell, 2003). Let’s discuss Weber’s three types of authorities, rational-legal, charisma and traditional, to better understand the benefits of each one.
Rational-legal authority characterizes hierarchical relations in modern society and most power relationships in contemporary organizations (Tolbert & Hall, 2009, p. 70). Legal authority invests in an individual on the basis of a normative or legal structure (Bower, 1971). In a rational-legal authority, the bureaucracy is rationally designed for optimum performance throughout each portion of an organizational structure, to help contribute to the whole (Jarvis, 2005). The rational-legal authority is based on a value system which understands the value of relationships in social organizations should be managed by a group of general laws and rules (Tolbert & Hall, 2009, p. 70). These laws and rules that are created with the purpose to deal efficiently and effectively with problems and questions that may be encountered by the people within this system
Max Weber, who is also know as one of the principal architect of modern social science, also has the distinct honor of being one of the foremost social theorist in the 20th century (Kim, 2007). Weber argued that all oppressive structures and all uses of power must exist within a legitimated order which is based on a complex mixture of two kinds of legitimating factors: subjective and objective (Allan, 2005, p. 151). Underlying the subjective and objective legitimacy, in referencing authority, Weber identified three ideal types of legitimacy upon which authority rests: rational-legal, charisma and traditional (Allan, 2005, p. 152). These three were considered Weber’s typology of authority, which Weber developed to help his effort in understanding the nature of modern organizations (Tolbert & Hall, 2009, p. 70). Weber’s typology of authority distinguishes the basis of a mixture of ways power may be exercised in any society or institution (Shortell, 2003). Let’s discuss Weber’s three types of authorities, rational-legal, charisma and traditional, to better understand the benefits of each one.
Rational-legal authority characterizes hierarchical relations in modern society and most power relationships in contemporary organizations (Tolbert & Hall, 2009, p. 70). Legal authority invests in an individual on the basis of a normative or legal structure (Bower, 1971). In a rational-legal authority, the bureaucracy is rationally designed for optimum performance throughout each portion of an organizational structure, to help contribute to the whole (Jarvis, 2005). The rational-legal authority is based on a value system which understands the value of relationships in social organizations should be managed by a group of general laws and rules (Tolbert & Hall, 2009, p. 70). These laws and rules that are created with the purpose to deal efficiently and effectively with problems and questions that may be encountered by the people within this system