July 27, 2011	Volume 11, Issue 30
Recommend this issue to a friend Join the Friends of Point Lookout HTML to link to this article…	Archive: By Topic    By Date Links to Related Articles Sign Up for A Tip A Day!
Create a perpetual bookmark to the current issue
| Follow @RickBrenner	Random Article

Kinds of Organizational Authority:
the Formal

by Rick Brenner

A clear understanding of Power, Authority, and Influence depends on familiarity with the kinds of authority found in organizations. Here's Part I of a little catalog of authority classes.

David Addington, John Yoo, and Chris Schroeder testify before the U.S. House Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties on June 26, 2008. Mr. Addington was was legal counsel (2001-2005) and chief of staff (2005-2009) to former Vice President Dick Cheney. Mr. Schroeder was in charge of the Bush Administration's Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) during the early years of the war on terror. Mr. Yoo worked in that office, authoring many internal memoranda about the use of torture. Generally, his position on torture was that the President could order torture, despite many laws prohibiting it, on the basis of his "constitutional authority to protect the nation from attack." The OLC is invested with legal and regulatory authority within the White House. It is this authority that was used to justify the use of torture. We may never know what happened or did not happen during those years, and we may never know definitively whether any crimes occurred. What does seem clear, however, is that the Presidency "captured" the OLC, in the sense that the OLC did not act as an independent legal authority. During those years, the Presidency was able to obtain whatever rulings it wanted to pursue the war on terror. Another example of capturing of legal authority within the U.S. administration is the string of events known colloquially as the "Saturday Night Massacre" — the firing of Archibald Cox in 1973 during the Watergate scandal.

The capturing of cognitive authorities, legal authorities, and administrative authorities does happen. When it does, the organization is at risk of undertaking self-destructive actions. Photo courtesy U.S. House of Representatives.

In the first installment of this series, we examined the interrelationships between power, authority, and influence, emphasizing the value that a systems view provides. Let's take a closer look now at the kinds of authority we find in organizations, beginning with kinds most often recognized as formal.

Cognitive authority

This term, coined by Patrick Wilson, denotes authority that influences thoughts that people consciously recognize as proper. It's specific to some particular field of knowledge. People usually confer it only upon someone whom they consider influential. In organizations, a common form of cognitive authority relates to the organization's mission and work. Since the organization's work usually factors into weakly interacting cells, its cognitive authority usually factors similarly.

We're most comfortable citing cognitive authority. Even when we must yield to other kinds of authority, we sometimes seek cognitive authority to support our choices. We call this process "rationalization."

Legal or regulatory authority

Because laws and regulations can constrain everything we do, this form of cognitive authority deserves special attention. Since it is one of the few forms of cognitive authority that doesn't factor easily into cells, those who possess it usually work closely with those at the center of power.

Ironically, legal authorities don't necessarily understand how to apply their authority in detail to the organization's work. Collaboration between legal experts and content experts is often necessary. The need for this collaboration is not always fully appreciated.

Administrative authority

Since this is the authority vested in an organizational position, it is sometimes (somewhat illegitimately) called "legitimate" authority. Administrative authority is thus founded on three relationships: that between the bearer of the authority and the organization; that between the organization and the conferrer; and that between the conferrer and the bearer.

For some, being influenced by administrative authority is difficult, because it entails acknowledging one's own inferior station in the organization. On the other hand, to some, using administrative authority can also be difficult, because it can feel like saying, For some, being influenced by
administrative authority is
difficult, because it entails
acknowledging one's own
inferior station in
the organization"Because I said so." Thus the exercise of administrative authority can be stressful to the relationship for both parties. This can lead both of them to seek the haven of cognitive authority, real or illusory.

Resource authority

This authority derives from control of inanimate resources, such as facilities, equipment, or finance. Although it's usually a form of administrative authority, resource authority is unique in that it excludes administrative authority over the people. Exercising resource authority as a means of influence entails, for example, the using rewards, rationing, withholding, bribing, granting, secreting, scheduling, and so on.

Using resource authority can be constructive or destructive for relationships. It can be facilitative or coercive. And there are gray areas: people can assert authority over resources that aren't formally theirs to control. Resource authority can thus be fertile territory for political wrangling.

Next time we'll investigate less formal kinds of authority. First in this series  Next in this series   Top    Next Issue

Is every other day a tense, anxious, angry misery as you watch people around you, who couldn't even think their way through a game of Jacks, win at workplace politics and steal the credit and glory for just about everyone's best work including yours? Read 303 Secrets of Workplace Politics, filled with tips and techniques for succeeding in workplace politics. Order Now!

Point Lookout is a free weekly email newsletter. Browse the archive of past issues. Subscribe for free.

Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.

Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.

On Beginnings

A new year has begun, and I'm contemplating beginnings. Beginnings can inspire, and sometimes lead to letdown when our hopes or expectations aren't met. How can we handle beginnings more powerfully?

Piling Change Upon Change: Management Credibility

When leaders want to change organizational directions, processes, or structures, some questions arise: How much change is too much change? Here's a look at one constraint: the risk to management credibility.

Good Change, Bad Change: Part I

Change is all around. Some changes are welcome and some not, but when we distinguish good change from bad, we often get it wrong. Why?

When Change Is Hard: Part II

When organizational change is difficult, we sometimes blame poor leadership or "resistance." But even when we believe we have good leadership and the most cooperative populations, we can still encounter trouble. Why is change so hard so often?

Obstacles to Finding the Reasons Why

When we investigate what went wrong, we sometimes encounter obstacles. Interviewing witnesses and participants doesn't always uncover the reasons why. What are these obstacles?

See also Organizational Change and Workplace Politics for more related articles.

Coaching services

Get the ebook!

• Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, USD 11.95)
• Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag Their Tails (PDF, USD 11.95)
• Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, USD 11.95)
• Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, USD 11.95)
• Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, USD 11.95)
• Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, USD 19.99)

Public seminars

The Race to the South Pole: Ten Lessons for Project Managers

On 14 December 1911, four men led by Roald Amundsen reached the South Pole. Thirty-five days later, Robert F. Scott and four others followed. Amundsen had won the race to the pole. Amundsen's party returned to base on 26 January 1912. Scott's party perished. As historical drama, why this happened is interesting enough, but to project managers, the story is fascinating. Lessons abound. Read more about this program. Here's an upcoming date for this program:

• Northern Quest Casino, 100 N Hayford Rd, Airway Heights, WA 99001: June 11, Professional Development Day, Inland Northwest Chapter of the Project Management Institute.
   

The Race to the South Pole: The Power of Agile Development

On 14 December 1911, four men led by Roald Amundsen reached the South Pole. Thirty-five days later, Robert F. Scott and four others followed. Amundsen had won the race to the pole. Amundsen's party returned to base on 26 January 1912. Scott's party perished. As historical drama, why this happened is interesting enough. Lessons abound. Among the more important lessons are those that demonstrate the power of the agile approach to project management and product development. Read more about this program. Here's an upcoming date for this program:

• Download to
  your calendarThe Yard, 1211 South Mammoth Road, Manchester, NH 03109: June 15, Seminar, New Hampshire Chapter of the Project Management Institute.