Weber develops a theory of the forms of legitimate domination in society (rational, traditional and charismatic forms of domination), which roughly define the bases of the legitimacy of power/influence in a given society and condition the types of organizations to be found within each of these types of domination. He then argues that bureaucracy is the organizational form developing within the framework of the rational form of domination and proceeds to give an ideal–typical description of bureaucracy, that is, a highly formalized and hierarchical form of organization characterized by the predominance of written rules and procedures, formalized tasks, precise definitions of competence, clear lines of subordination, the explicit separation of ownership and management responsibility, and the merit principle as the only legitimate route of access to the different functions in the organization. He sees the unifying dynamics at work, pushing towards the development and generalization of bureaucratic organizations as they are both legitimate and more efficient and the roots of this greater efficiency essentially in the fact that the arbitrary imposition of power and the resulting interpersonal conflicts are limited by written rules and procedures which allow for more rational, foreseeable, and standardized execution of tasks.
I think this a really good summary of the types of authority. I think they also made a really interesting point about voluntary and involuntary obedience. Im not sure how to articulate it, but they seem to imply that the level of agency in choosing to submit isn’t relative, so long as submission happens. I think it very much does matter, especially talking about the ability to overturn corrupt governments.
I think this is a very good summary. I think that it would be interesting to plot the legitimization of regimes against the levels of patronage or civil society in the state. As Grindle revealed; some states exist currently with plenty of patronage because they can adapt to the times and are flexible enough to provide services states need to provide. my curiosity lies in: would there be any correlation between the legitimization of a regime and its levels of corruption? I would think yes, despite the fact that those regimes in Latin America pointed out by Grindle are very effective.
The reason I posted this twice is that when I refreshed the first time it wasn’t here.
So apparently I need to approve everything to make it here 😂😂