The term “authority” refers to an abstract concept with both sociological and psychological components. As a child born of a myriad of different social situations which have some rough similarities, no easy definition exists. Of particular concern throughout the literature on the topic is the entanglement of the concepts of authority, power and legitimacy.
Power is the ability, whether personal or social, to get things done - either to enforce one’s own will or to enforce the collective will of some group over others. Legitimacy is a socially constructed and psychologically accepted right to exercise power.
A person can have legitimacy but no actual power (the legitimate king might reside in exile, destitute and forgotten). A person can have actual power but not legitimacy (the usurper who exiled the king and appropriates the symbols of office).
In all social situations a person is treated as an authority only when he has both power andm legitimacy1. We might consider, for example, the phrase uttered so often when someone intrudes into our business in order to give commands: “You have no authority here.” What does that mean? It might mean that the person has no legitimate claim to be heard or heeded2. It might mean that the person has no social power - he has not the ability to enforce his will over the objections of others. Or, it might be both. In any event, both must be present for authority to exist (socially) and be acknowledged (psychologically).
When a person has authority over others, it means something a bit more than simply that he has a right to exercise existing power3. The missing ingredient is psychological - the previously mentioned but not explicated issue of acknowledgment. Both power and legitimacy are social in that they exist in the interplay between two or more humans. Yet what goes on in the mind of a person when he acknowledges the authority of another?
It isn’t simply that he accepts the factual existence of power or legitimacy; rather, it’s that he accepts that an authority figure is justified in making a decision without also explaining the reason for that4, and persuading others to accept that the decision was reached properly. If I have authority over you, I can expect that when I make a decision you will go along with that decision, even if I don’t take the time to explain it to you and persuade you that it is indeed right. Your acceptance of me as an authority implies that you have implicitly agreed to be persuaded, and won’t demand explicit explanations and reasons5. When you act, it won’t be because of me enforcing my will over you, nor will it have anything to do with the legitimacy of my power. Instead, it will simply be you exercising your will for your own reasons.
