Power and Authority Free-Samples for Students-Myassignmenthelp

Question: What is Power and What is Authority in your View, and how do these two Concepts relate to one another in Decision Making Context. Answer: Introduction All life forms are characterized by domination of one group over the other groups with regard to the allocation of resources, distribution of the same or undertaking a particular task. It could also take an individual perspective. In this respect, either power or authority will be revealed. The manner in which influence on an individual basis or group is conducted will reveal whether it is power in play or authority. Nevertheless, the presence of either of the concepts in social, political, cultural or economic settings cannot be questioned. In order to understand how these concepts are similar, different and overlap each other, the paper takes an investigative attempt to bring forth the interrelationship adapted by power and authority. It will take an examination of their application in far diverse settings with specific emphasis on what connects and differentiates them as well. Most importantly, an in-depth analysis will seek to lay bare their application in decision making process . Power and Authority Power alludes to the ability or rather the potential that a person or a group of people have to influence another group or an individual to perform a particular act. Usually the eventual decision to perform the act in question does not have to be voluntary. In essence, power connotes to the ability to influence events. This ability could be personal which pays homage to personal power. Basically, a person gets their personal power from either personality or from the expert knowledge they possess. For instance it could be cultivated from the academic path. Engineers, Doctors, Programmers, Lawyers among others derive their power from their professional knowledge as well as their expertise (Bassan et al, 2016). Furthermore, power could also be either official or legitimate power. An important aspect of power is that it comes from a higher authority. Authority must always flow downwards. It is always delegated from the top to the bottom. Authority basically implies the claim of legitimacy, right or justification to exercise command over a certain group of people or individuals to act in a particular way. It is established through being able to wield collective power rather than having people deciding to use the same power independently. In other words, authority is important for the overall achievement of collective goals. When people are called upon through a certain system to exercise over others, they are mandated to do so (Wolin, 2016). It is guided by a certain followed rules that determine what is wrong and what is correct as well. In this regard, authority implies that people are influenced to partake in an act that is both lawful and just because what gives them such command is honored by a section of laws mainly in the constitution. Therefore, its conduct must follow and an authorized manner as well. Conceptualization of power and authority can be distinguished in the following example. A riot erupts involving the law enforcement in a given area with a notorious mob. Following the law enforcement losing control of the area, the army is therefore ordered to intervene in order to have restoration of order (Li, Matouschek Powell, 2017). In this case, the chief of police has authority but does not have power. Clearly, he/she has the responsibility and the right to exert power but again, he does not command the effective means to do it. On the other hand, the head of the mob has power. He can decide to direct his mob as the sees it fit (Guinote, 2017). However, he does not have the authority. More so, the use of mob power is not lawful or legitimate. However, the head of the military has both power and authority. Therefore, he has the responsibility and legal right to proceed in directing his unit. This underscores his authority as well as the unit being his source of power as well. In terms of the decision making as aforementioned above, authority lays emphasis on the command by people of top leadership to those of the lower echelons. It calls upon them to undertake certain tasks. In an organization, managers are called upon to command others to ensure that they perform the tasks expected of them by management with a key reason of achieving the objectives of an organization in general (Popitz, Gotlich, 2017). This is similar to the government structure. The president has the authority to command the cabinet to see certain actions are taken with regard to the objectives decided on (Hill, Jones Morales, 2013). It is their right for instance to have things being done in a manner that it is needed through others. It is therefore their right to make decisions clearly. A manager gets his authority by virtue of his position or rather post and all his decisions result from the fact that he/she has power. Most significantly, top level management authorities should get their authority from key stakeholders in the industry, be it governmental or non-governmental (Suleiman, 2015). In this case, it implies that authority must always flow from the highest level to the lowest level. It is delegated from the top to the bottom. Decision making feeds on the manner and nature that both power and authority are delegated in any institution. For the case of power, its generally given to a person who has authority of knowledge in most of the business organizations. This power of knowledge can either be acquired through education or perceived by nature which practically alludes to the leadership tendencies. On the other hand, the role played by an individual or a group in the society gives them the audacity to project authority. For instance, the police have authority to arrest people as well as carry out prosecution on them as dictated by individual actions which are usually criminal according to Siddiqui (2017). However, the decision making for persons with authority follows a very clear and thought out procedure. Certain conditions have to be met for that authority to be valid. In democratic institutions, decisions that are perceived to be made out of being in authoritative position have to be vetted. Vetting c ould be done prior to its making by following rules and regulations that have been put in place. Essentially, decision making has to be accountable to the people it is going to have an impact on. For instance, the President has the authority to declare a state of emergency in most of the democratic countries in the world although this has to be honored in the constitution for it to be valid and not draw reactions that are likely to jeopardize it. Power on the other hand, provides room for absolute decision making. Due to its susceptibility to be abused, a system of checks and balances must be put in place to control it. This is a common practice in most democracies in the world. The likely illegitimacy of power in most circumstances implies that people could easily fall into the trap of abusing it as a result. While authority of power have a thin line separating them, they are hence consistent with overlapping aspects. For instance, prevalence of power is down to possession of knowledge far beyond others particularly in cases of academic feats. Such a person is therefore able to amass more power than others. As a result he/she will be instrumental in influencing the decisions of others in a manner that favors their own position. It will be used to gain more power hence giving them the authority to partake what they would wish to do to anybody. An example of this case scenario is whereby people in the academic world opt to join politics. By doing this, political power will give them authority to advance their interests over the larger majority. A person with power will therefore be able to influence the decisions of others both consciously and unconsciously. This illustrates the manner in which power goes hand in hand with authority. Having powerful turns people into authoritative nature wh ich primarily alludes to a powerful authority. It further lays emphasis on the claim that power gives people authority which further alienates them into higher grounds subsumed into both concepts. Conceptualization of power and authority projects a grey area when the issues of morality are brought into focus. Basically, the fact that morality is conceived as moral since it is constructed on the scale of legality, it implies that power has the tendency to corrupt this morality. The aspects of right and wrong therefore blur the issue. For instance, historically, the Nazis sanctioned the exercise of state authority to launch their barbaric acts and so they are rightly deemed immoral. On the same page, during the world war two partisans in France exercised raw power against the same NAZI occupiers through sabotage (. Their actions are rightly deemed moral. This has created a big overlap. Authority and power predisposes the issues of morality vis--vis immorality as well as legality and illegality. In this case, the retaliatory actions of the French on the Nazi are generally deemed as moral while when the coin is flipped, it is immoral in the first instance where the Nazi made the a ssault. Authority essentially flows from power and so on itself it cannot provide a baseline. Power begets authority. A person must first of all acquire power before they can command authority. And commanding this authority is centered on power. Should none of them fail to achieve its target then the other becomes clearly useless (Basan et al, 2016). Power and authority must therefore coexist. One cannot have one without the other. For instance, a person can have the authority over a certain will but lack the power to impose this will. It therefore makes authority useless without the influence of power. Power and authority are nonetheless similar in a number of ways which further broadens their interrelationship. The two concepts are prone to manipulation to suit individual interests even though power stands on the pedestal. Since both of them are borne out of a consensus, should there be a legitimate process that allows its implementation in the society then it means that they achieve their desired goals (Wolin, 2016). However, since all of them are susceptible to bowing into individual interest or group interest that categorically outmaneuvers the rest, the goals of either can be dislodged as a result. Both of them can be corrupted whether they are applied singularly or in complement of each other. According to Pye Pye (2009), power and authority have an uncanny knack of getting to the head and messing up the definitive values, behavior and acts which got people into those positions of leadership. In other words, they both provide way from leading to welfare to leading a way to d isaster. It only take a little change of tact by the partisan parties. Simply put, power alludes to a means of performing a particular action. It leaves a person who wields it to choose what they can decide to do with it. It could be disaster or beneficial. For instance, a person of influence can either decide to influence people to do or act in a certain way. Having authority puts one in the same situation whereby they have to take the same choices (Giroux, 2016). In terms of leadership, they both equip people to take tasks that have a large impact either directly or indirectly in their lives. Conclusion Power and authority are closely related concepts as reflected by the similarity of the role they play in the society. They both have an important role in the society if well regulated since they put individuals in positions of influence. Through this influence, they can be instrumental in putting forth favorable polices and initiatives for the benefit of the society at large. While authority alludes to a claim of legitimacy which transpires into a downward of influence and command such that it is those at the lower levels of authority that have to ensure accountability is recognized on the higher authority, power indicates the influence to have people do what one desires. The two concepts also have higher levels of overlap in that authority flows from power. For one to have an activity done, they must have power even if authority is present. As a result, it points to their relationship in decision making. All in all, the close interrelationship of these concepts means that their appl ication in any social, political or economic concept must follow a well-structured manner to avoid corrupting either of them since they are susceptible to manipulation. References Basaran, T., Bigo, D., Guittet, E. P., Walker, R. B. J. (Eds.). (2016).International Political Sociology: Transversal Lines. Routledge. Giroux, H. A. (2016).Stealing innocence: Youth, corporate power and the politics of culture. Springer. Guinote, A. (2017). How Power Affects People: Activating, Wanting, and Goal Seeking.Annual Review of Psychology,68, 353-381. Hill, J. A., Jones, P., Morales, A. J. (Eds.). (2013).Experiencing Power, Generating Authority: Cosmos, Politics, and the Ideology of Kingship in Ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia. University of Pennsylvania Press. Li, J., Matouschek, N., Powell, M. (2017). Power dynamics in organizations.American Economic Journal: Microeconomics,9(1), 217-241. Popitz, H., Gottlich, A. (2017).Phenomena of Power: Authority, Domination, and Violence. Columbia University Press. Pye, M. W., Pye, L. W. (2009).Asian power and politics: The cultural dimensions of authority. Harvard University Press. Siddiqui, S. (2017). Power vs. Authority: al-Juwayn?s Intervention in Pragmatic Political Thought.Journal of Islamic Studies, etw057. Suleiman, E. N. (2015).Politics, power, and bureaucracy in France: The administrative elite. Princeton University Press. Wolin, S. (2016). Theories of the political, political theory, and politics.Politics and the Concept of the Political: The Political Imagination, 222.