Social power: definition and types

A teacher has power over his students. Parents have it on their children. A boss has power over his employees. Politicians have it and often abuse it. Social power is present in all areas of life. Certain professions have greater social power than others. Now, but… what really is power?

It is the ability to exercise hegemonic dominance over one and/or several individuals. It is also the ability to influence one and/or several individuals and indicate the supreme authority recognized in a society.. As we see, the definition of power is as broad as it is diffuse. In history there have been different definitions, theories and typologies of power, so to understand it it is better to know some of the most accepted ones.

Thus, one of the first to talk to us about power was Friedrich Nietzsche (2005). He understood the will to power as an ambition. Almost at the same time, Max Weber defined it as the opportunity or possibility existing in a social relationship that allows an individual to fulfill his or her own will.

Later, from Marxism, several authors studied this concept. Closer to our time, A French philosopher, Michel Foucault, developed one of the most extensive analyzes of power.

Although there have been more authors, these have been some of the most relevant, without forgetting the works on social power that have emerged from psychology.

Social power and Max Weber

Social power and its impact in each of our contexts is a factor that has always interested the scientific community.. Thus, studies such as the one carried out by the psychologist Leonard Pickman and published in the Journal of Applied Social Psychologythey reveal something interesting to us.

There are people who see the power position of some figures with respect to others as legitimate.. It is as if this assumption already existed within us, that some figures have the right to have greater influence and control over others.

Max Weber was one of the most important thinkers of the 20th century and the first to address this topic. Although his field of study is very varied, his work on the area of ​​power is undoubtedly the most notable.

For Weber, social power means “the probability of imposing one’s will, within a relationship, even against all resistance and whatever the basis of that probability. (Weber, 2005)”.

Power and domination

Power implies the potential ability to impose one’s will and can manifest itself in different ways. While domination, understood as a form of command-obedience, would be the most successful way to express power.

Within domination there are different types. One of the most important would be legitimacy, which is the belief in the validity of a certain order or social relationship. There are three forms of legitimacy in domination (Weber, 2007):

Rational legal domination: “It is based on the belief in the legality of the established order and the right to give orders by those who have the competence to exercise domination according to that order.”Traditional domination: “It is based on the usual belief in the sacredness of long-existing traditions and in the legitimacy of the constituents to exercise authority under those traditions.”Charismatic domination: “It is based on the extraordinary dedication of holiness, heroism or exemplarity of a person and the order created or revealed by this person.”

Marxism

According to Karl Marx “the political movement of the working class has as its final objective the seizure of political power (letter to Bolte, November 292, 1871)”. When it comes to the conquest of social power, political class struggle is the basis.

Furthermore, it is above other forms of class struggle such as economic or ideological. Although according to Marx, changes in the economic base can influence the seizure of power, political practices will have greater weight (Sánchez Vázquez, 2014).

However, Marx did not create a theory of power. But if implies that “political power, properly speaking, is the organized violence of one class for the oppression of another.” (Marx and Engels, 2011)”. Therefore, later Marxists delved deeper into theories of social power. For example, for Antonio Gramsci (1977) the power of the dominant classes over the proletariat and all the classes subject to the capitalist production model is not simply given by the control of the repressive apparatus of the state. Said power is fundamentally given by the cultural “hegemony” that the dominant classes manage to exert over the subject classes, through the control of the educational system, religious institutions and the media.

Michel Foucault

Foucault argued that power is found everywhere, because it does not come from anywhere. Therefore, power could not be located in an institution or state and the Marxist idea of ​​seizing power would not be possible. Power is a relationship of forces that exists in a society at a given moment.

Thus, power, being the result of power relations, is everywhere. And subjects cannot be considered independent of these relationships.

Foucault, turning around previous conceptions of power, asks How can power relations produce rules of law that in turn produce discourses of truth? Although power, law and truth feed off each other, power always maintains a certain preponderant influence over law and truth.

Although Foucault analyzes power in various contexts and times, one of the most important conceptions is that of biopower (Foucault, 2000). Biopower is a practice of modern states by which they control the population.

Modern power, according to Foucault’s analysis, is codified in social practices and human behavior as the subject gradually accepts the subtle regulations and expectations of the social order.

With biopower, we give way to a biological regularization of life. A classic example is found in psychiatric hospitals, prisons and courts, which define the norms by which a part of the population separates itself from society (Foucault, 2002).

Social power in psychology

Within social psychology, John French and Bertram Raven (1959) proposed five forms of power. The resources on which those who exercise power rely would be based on these five forms. Such forms of power are the following:

The legitimate power: power of an individual or group thanks to the relative position and obligations of the leader within an organization or society. Legitimized power confers formal delegated authority on the person who exercises it.Reference power: ability of certain individuals to persuade or influence others. It is based on the charisma and interpersonal skills of the person in power. Here the person subjected to power takes the power bearer as a model and tries to act like him.The expert power: It derives from the skills or expertise of some people and the needs that the organization or society has for these skills. Unlike the other categories, this type of power is usually very specific and limited to the particular area in which the expert is qualified.Reward Power: It depends on the leader’s ability to provide material rewards. It refers to how the individual can give others some type of benefits as a reward, such as: free time, gifts, promotions, increases in salary or responsibility.The power of coercion: It is based on the ability to impose punishments on the part of the person who holds it. It can be assimilated to the ability to eliminate or not give rewards and has its source in the desire of those who submit to it to obtain rewards with value, but in the negative form of the fear of losing them. That fear is what, ultimately, ensures the effectiveness of that type of power.

Psychological research on social power

Within experimental psychology the issue of power has also been addressed. Among the most notable discoveries is the tendency that The more power an individual or collective has, the less the perspective of others is considered, which implies that the powerful have less empathy..

Likewise, it has been shown that powerful people are also more likely to act. For example, they are more likely to eliminate any annoying stimuli from the environment compared to less powerful people. Other research has also documented the bystander effect, which shows that powerful people are three times more likely to offer help to a “stranger in distress.”​

On the other hand, one study suggested that Powerful people: generate creative ideas who are less influenced by outstanding examples; they express attitudes that conform less to the opinions expressed by others; and are more influenced by their own social value orientation in relation to the reputation of a negotiating opponent.

Conclusion

As has been seen, the conceptions of social power have been diverse and have been greatly influenced by the time. From a conception of power as domination over a person, power has come to be understood as a complex network of relationships.

This more current conception of power tells us that we are always involved in power relations. Each interaction we carry out will be characterized by existing power differences. Therefore, being aware of social power is a first step to avoid its influence and not to exercise it.

You might be interested…