Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T21:49:22.614Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Two Faces of Authority: A Critique

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 September 2015

Robert Spillane  and
Lynda Spillane
Robert Spillane
Affiliation:
Macquarie Graduate School of Management, Macquarie University, North Ryde NSW 2109, Australia Tel: (02) 9850 8995, Fax: (02) 98507698
Lynda Spillane
Affiliation:
Macquarie Graduate School of Management, Macquarie University, North Ryde NSW 2109, Australia Tel: (02) 9850 8995, Fax: (02) 98507698
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In the management literature, authority is generally defined as, or confused with, power (legitimate or otherwise) on the one hand, or (less frequently) attributed to subordinate concession on the other. In short, authority is thought to have two faces. The aim of the present paper is to demonstrate the confusions surrounding the use of authority and to suggest that more attention should be directed to the important differences between authority, power and legitimacy. An analysis of managerial authority is discussed that argues for the crucial relationship, recognised by the ancients, between authority and rhetoric. Authority, it is argued, is not legitimate power but a source of power and is established by effective rhetoric.

Keywords

• Authority• Power• Legitimacy• Rhetoric• Management
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Management & Organization , Volume 5 , Issue 1 , January 1999 , pp. 1 - 11
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press and Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management 1999

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Andreski, S (1988) Max Weber's Insights and Errors London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Aristotle, The Art of Rhetoric (Trans. Freese, J.H. 1991) Cambridge Mass: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Aron, R (1976) Main Currents in Sociological Thought Vol. 2 Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
Barnard, C (1938) The Functions of the Executive Camb., Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Bendix, R (1959) Max Weber: An Intellectual Portrait London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Bolman, LG and Deal, TE (1991) Reframing Organisations: Artistry, Choice and Leadership San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Bowman, C and Jarrett, M (1996) Management in Practice (3rd Ed.) Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.Google Scholar
Cartwright, D (ed) (1959) Studies in Social Power Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, Institute of Social Research.Google Scholar
Clegg, S (1975) Power, Rule & Domination London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Clegg, S (1989) Frameworks of Power London: SageGoogle Scholar
Dahl, RA (1957) ‘The Concept of Power’ Behavioural Science Vol 2 pp 201–215Google Scholar
Donaldson, L (1985) In Defence of Organisation Theory Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
Drucker, P (1979) Management London: Pan BooksGoogle Scholar
French, JRP and Raven, B (1959) ‘The Bases of Social Power’ in Cartwright, D (ed) Studies in Social Power Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, Institute of Social Research.Google Scholar
Friedrich, C J (1963) Man & His Government New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Handy, CB (1985) Understanding Organisations (3rd ed) Harmondsworth: PenguinGoogle Scholar
Hannagan, T (1995) Management: Concepts & Practice London: PitmanGoogle Scholar
Hopkins, TK (1961) ‘Bureaucratic Authority: The Convergence of Weber & Barnard’ in Etzioni, A (ed) Complex Organisations New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Lansbury, R and Spillane, R (1991) Organisational Behaviour: The Australian Context Melbourne: Longman CheshireGoogle Scholar
Lewin, K (1951) Field Theory in Social Science New York: Harper.Google Scholar
Mintzberg, H (1983) Power In and Around Organisations Englewood Cliffs NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Morgan, G (1986) Images of Organisations Beverly Hills CA: SageGoogle Scholar
Parsons, T (1937) The Structure of Social Action New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Perrow, C (1986) Complex Organisations: A Critical Essay (3rd ed) Glenview, Ill.: Scott Foresman.Google Scholar
Pfeffer, J (1981) Power in Organisations Marshfield MA: PitmanGoogle Scholar
Pfeffer, J (1992) Managing with Power Harvard: Harvard University PressGoogle Scholar
Robbins, SP (1994) Management (4th ed) Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice HallGoogle Scholar
Salaman, G (1995) Managing Buckingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar
Simon, HA (1957) Models of Man New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Weaver, R (1970) Language is Sermonic Baton Rouge: Louisiana.Google Scholar
Weber, M (1947) The Theory of Social & Economic Organisation (Trans. Henderson, A & Parsons, T) Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Yuill, BF (1970) Organisation & Management Sydney: West Publishing.Google Scholar