Group Dynamics

UNIT 4 CONFORMITY AND OBEDIENCE

Objectives
After going through this unit, you should be able to :

Understand and explain the meaning of conformity and obedience

appreciate the nature of Compliance, Identification and Internalization

understand the experimental designs and significance of Milgram's studies

appreciate the dynamics of influences on individual's response to group

conformity.

Structure
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
4.8
4.9
4.10
4.11
4.12
4.13

4.1

Introduction
Conformity
Compliance
Identification
Internalization
Reference and Membership Groups
Cooperation
Competition
Milgram's Study
Why and how of Empowerment
Summary
Self-Assessment Questions
Further Readings

INTRODUCTION

Human society from the inception of its civilization has confronted several dualities.
One particular duality which confronts us even today is between freedom and
conformity, empowerment and obedience. At different points of human civilization
it was believed that conformity and obedience are the best forms of social
governance. It was also believed that freedom and empowerment gives rise to chaos
and destabilization of social order. Although such thought basically reflects pre
industrial mind set, it is not uncommon even today to come across people in the
work organizations whose most important "wish-list" happens to be conformity and
obedience from their subordinates.
There is definite reason for which people expect conformity and obedience from
others. To some extent the reason can be traced in the meaning of these words.
Conformity is defined as the act of compliance, acquiescing or yielding to a
tendency to yield readily to others especially in a weak and subservient way.
Obedience is defined as the state or quality of being obedient or the act or practice of
obeying dutifully, in otherwise submissive compliance. An example of conformity
and obedience can best be derived from any regimented structure - a totalitarian state
and Military service can be considered as fairly god examples. It is also fairly known
that, in these types of social structures problems are plenty. These social structures
have to deploy enormous amount of resources to impost' control and suppress the
human beings eternal desire for freedom.

4.2

CONFORMITY

'

Conformity can be defined as a change in a person's behaviour or opinions as a

result of real or imagined pressures from a person or group of people.'.

86

(Aronson 1976.' 17)

`the action of a subject when he goes along with his peers, people of his own status,
who have no special right to direct his behaviour.'

Conformity and
Obedience

(Milgram 1974: 113)

`a conformist might be defined as a person who has managed to avoid being defined
as a deviant.'
(Schur 1979: 18)
Response to conformity pressures varies according to many different factors. While
the most intelligent group members are less likely to conform, authoritarian
personalities are more likely to do so: Where the membership of a group maintains
both sexes, conformity levels are higher than in single-sex groups. Other variables
that relate to increasing conformity are the size of majority in favour, the ambiguity
of the situation, agreement among most other members and the open and
decentralized nature of the group" communication systems (Shaw 1974).
If a member sees that most of the other members are more competent than he or she
is, then he or sheds much more likely to conform to the pressures that the group
exerts. Conformity is related to security and acceptance, the sense of not being alone
in having to face the problems of life, and it induces order into the group situation
with the enhanced probability of integrating and coordinating individual behaviour.
Aronson (1976) suggests that in unfamiliar situations we tend to conform to the
behaviour of others whom we suspect `know the ropes'. Aronson asserts that
behaviour we learn in this way tends to be enduring because it is an exercise in
determining reality, an attempt to make sense of a part of our world that, being
unfamiliar, lacks security.
Fear lies at the base of conformity, the fear of not being accepted. The greater the
respect an individual has for the others of his group members, the more need there is
to be accepted, and the greater is the pressure that the group can exert to produce a
public conformity to its norms, rules, and standards. But public conformity is not
necessarily private acceptance and it is this (a continuing conformity even when the
pressure to conform is removed) that is the element of change.
Festinger's (1957) concept of cognitive dissonance helps to explain something of
conformity pressure. The tension created by holding conflicting cognitions has to be
resolved by first changing one element of the behaviour; second, finding examples
that reduce its dissonant effect; or third, creating cognitions that indicate that the
dissonant behaviour is in fact good and beneficial. The reduction of an individual's
dissatisfaction in a social situation is achieved by producing behaviour acceptable to
the others or by redefining needs relative to the situation.
If there are alternative sources, of need satisfaction available, for example, other
groups, then, if there are no restrictions on movement, when the pressure to conform
becomes too great it will tend to reduce an individual's level of satisfaction for his or
her group below the point where these at alternative sources become more attractive.
When this happens, individual will move, for even the dissatisfactions and
consequences of moving can be overcome if the pressure is great enough. This is a
serious consideration for groups where members cannot move and where pressure
generating high levels of dissatisfaction exists. Psychological withdrawal may be one
method of coping but others, much more disruptive and designed to change the
situation, are equally likely.
Allen (1965) suggested that apart from the problem of private and public acceptance
there are ten situational factors that influence an individual's response to group
conformity pressures:
1.
2.
3.
4.

The level of commitment to the group

The level of attractiveness of the group
Status in the group
The degree of interdependence within the group

87

Group Dynamics

5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.

The group's composition

The group's size and unanimity
The extent to which the nature of the group norms are extreme
Whether the group is task competent
What level of task'
How difficult and important the task is.

Activity 1
Interview ten people around you whom you know, ask them whether they have been
influenced by someone/groups or they, have influenced others/groups. 'How many
times it was successful

.
Allen ended his essay on situational factors in conformity thus: `Neither should we
fail to realize that other modes of response to group pressure are available to a person
in addition to conformity or nonconformity' (Allen :1965: 142). Conformity is
dependent behaviour. It requires that those it affects should be of equal status. It
spreads by imitation. The requirement to conform is implicit and the conformist
believes that his or her autonomy has been retained. Tactical conformity may be an
ingratiating' act but in general conformity means 'bringing one's behaviour within
bounds defined as acceptable by group members and doing one's best to meet their
expectations' (Sherif 1976:100). It is a democratic process in that it attempts to create
sameness.

4.3

COMPLIANCE

'This term best describes the mode of behaviour of a person who is motivated by a
desire to gain reward or avoid punishment. Typically his behaviour is only as longlived as is the promise of the reward or the threat of punishment. '
(Aronson 1976: 29)
He that complies against his will [I]so of his own opinions still.
(Butler :1663: '33)
Compliance is another possible response to the influence a group can exert. A
consideration of compliance brings into focus the problems of public and private
behavior. On the face of it, compliance appears to be conformity. The compliant
person apparently accepts the norms, standards, and values of the system he or she is
currently inhabiting. His or her reasons for this behaviour are obvious. Like an
animal that blends with its background, the compliant person becomes unnoticed and
acceptable. In a word, he or she has ensured personal security, freedom to move
about and an avoidance of being highlighted as being different.

88

The newcomer to an established group' encounters problems precisely of this nature.

If there is a strong need to belong and to be accepted, then there will be compliance
with the demands made by the group without any realization of the real reasons for
these demands. When the individual feels secure, he or she may not only be able to
question or even resist some of the demands, but also be able to assess the
consequences of such noncompliance upon his or her satisfaction. Compliance
equates obedience and appears to arise as an attempt on the part of an individual to
attract reward and avoid punishment. The behavior tends to last only as long as the
promise of reward or threat is sustained as behavior can change when the situation
changes. However, there is some indication that compliance with small demands
facilitates

compliance with, larger requests, probably because the complying person has already
become involved and also because his or her attitudes may have been significantly
changed by the first act of compliance.

Conformity and
Obedience

The basic factor in compliance is the compliant person's perception of the ability of
the influencer to give rewards or punishments. This equates with the first of five
social powers delineated by French and Raven (1959). If the power referent is
constantly in attendance then compliant behaviour assumes a greater durability.
Similarly, if the compliant person's satisfactions are in creased by the act of either in
the actions themselves or the consequences of those actions then the compliant state
will tend to endure.
Generally speaking, the compliant person holds complying opinions and values
lightly and does not believe in them. He or she is demonstrating a public compliance.
Milgram (1974) believed that the reward received by the compliant person may be a.
profound emotional gratification' and suggested that compliant behaviour took place
in a hierarchical structure; it was not imitative, its prescriptions were explicit, and
compliant people tended to resign their autonomy.
Compliance perpetuates inequality and is concerned with the maintenance of differentials.
But from the point of view of the compliant person it is one way of dealing with social
influence; it provides security and. a breathing space without undue commitment.

4.4

IDENTIFICATION

Identification is another response to group pressure. To identify indicates a desire to

be like the influencer and is concerned with attractiveness. Satisfaction in this case
resides in taking on the values, opinions, and beliefs of the influencer, and creating a
self denying relationship. Negative identification is possible in which dislike
engenders rejection of all that the disliked influencer stands for.
Identification appears to be a very powerful agent in advertising and selling because
people whom the advertising audience like, and can identify with,' can influence
opinion about products as long as these are not too important. Similarly, prejudices
can be picked up by identification with people who hold them.
The continuous pressure necessary in compliance is not essential in identification,
which is associated with, and conterminous with, the perception of the source of
influence. This can be seen as three important variables:
1.

The influencer needs to remain important.

2.

The influencer needs to continue to hold the same beliefs.

3.

The identifier's beliefs are not challenged by opinions that turn out to be
logically more convincing.

The latter shows that identification contains as part of the satisfaction to the
identifier a large element of the desire to be right.

4.5

INTERNALIZATION

Conformity, compliance, and identification are relatively transient responses to

group pressure, internalization is not. As with identification, there is a strong
element of the desire to be right in its formation. The satisfaction that
internalization gives is thus intense and this allows the influence to become
independent of the source and an integral part of the internalizer.
If the influencing agent, group, or person is perceived as trustworthy and as
possessing good judgement, then the values and beliefs of that agent will become
an integral part of the internalizer's value system. The will become his or her values
and will be very difficult to

89

Group Dynamics

change. As the desire to be right (that is, not to appear to be stupid; ignorant, or
foolish) is a very powerful and self-sustaining motivation, the continued presence of
the influencing agent is not necessary and may even be forgotten after a period of
time.
Because of these factors the internalizer has more flexible responses than is allowed
by any of the other responses because the system he or she is operating from is his or
her private system based on credibility.

4.6

REFERENCE AND MEMBERSHIP GROUPS

In social psychological theory, it has long been recognized that an. individual's
membership groups have an important influence on the values and attitudes he holds.
More recently, attention has also been given to the influence of his reference groups:
the groups in which he aspires to attain or maintain membership.'
(Siegel and Siegel 1957: 300)
Reference groups have been called `invisible committees' and appear to act as a
standard against which an individual measures his or her performance. Even the
knowledge that he or she may never actually come face to face with one of his or her
reference groups - indeed, it may no longer be in existence like the childhood family
- does not appear to lessen the influence its norms can have on behaviour. A degree
of internalization of the standards and values of the reference group has taken place
so that these values become integrated in the individual and need no continuing
support from the source. It is this particular influence on an individual's action that is
so hard to appreciate.
Carolyn Sherif (1976) calls reference groups and persons `the social connections of
self and illustrates the point by showing how the many groups of which she is, and
has been, a member are her `social anchors', the links that tic her to the society in
which in large measure give meaning to her life. In any one social situation most of
these `social anchors' are not visible, but they can have quite a great effect on the
behaviour of the anchored individual. How can an observer interpret behaviour that is
not wholly related to the current observable scene but partly to a hidden and powerful
pre-programming?
The greater the individual's respect for his or her reference group, the more he or she
will have internalized their norms. These will become the standards to live by, guides
to relationships, and will establish attitudes and condition responses to major life
events. Not all of the individual's reference groups will fit happily together and there
may well be conflicting messages.
Some reference groups and persons may not be human or real in the sense that they
can be -fictional, historical, or imaginary. What is important is that they represent and
produce standards that can be integrated into an individual's value scheme. It is
possible to stretch the concept to include ideas, abstract principles, and ideals as
forming standards in the same way. As Sprott (1958:60) has said, `We are to a large
measure the artifacts of our affiliations'.
Two other responses need to be given brief consideration. These are co-operation and
competition.

4.7

90

CO-OPERATION

Because co-operative behaviour (that is, going along with others) has great survival
value, it is a response to group pressure that is well understood by most people. It is
dependent on the perception that in order to achieve a given goal individuals need
one another. If the goal is important (i.e. superordinate), then individuals will be
willing to sacrifice other important personal issues in order co-operate with others
in its attainment'. While, co-operative

endeavour is in progress, a state of mutual inter dependence occurs and there is a

tendency to reduce hostility and prejudice and to increase friendliness and
attentiveness to others.

4.8

Conformity and
Obedience

COMPETITION

Competition is formed strongly on the need to achieve and seems to be an essential

element of Western society. Aggressive behaviour, the need to dominate, to succeed
arid to do well are all aspects of competition between individuals and groups.
Prejudice, discrimination and stereotyping are all strengthened in the presence of
competition.
On the other hand work organizations expect some amount of conformity and
obedience from its members. Work organizations by nature do not expect its
members to behave like mature adults. Commitment and involvement are the two
most civilized expressions; which ate widely valued in the organizations. There are
enough theoretical and empirical validity to prove that nature of commitment and
involvement of the organizational members depend upon the nature of power used at
micro and macro levels in the organization. When coercive power is used it gives
rise to alienation, remunerative power gives rise to calculative involvement and only
normative power gives rise to moral commitment on the part of the organizational
members.

4.9

MILGRAM'S STUDY

It is some 30 years since the social psychologist Stanley Milgram began his study on
the dynamics of obedience to authority. Some salient features of the studies can be
summarized as follows.
1.

The enormity of the basic findings - that 64 per cent of a sample average
American adult men were willing to punish another person with increasingly
higher voltages of electric shock when ordered to do so by an experimenter
who possessed no coercive power to enforce his orders.

2.

The studies represent one of the largest integrated research programs ever
conducted in social psychology (Milgram conducted over 20 variations of
his experimental design and used over 1000 subjects.

3.

Milgram's studies have fundamental and far-reaching implications for our

understanding of human behavior and, more particularly, the extent to which
a person's behavior is determined by particular situational and organizational
factors.

The basic experimental design of Milgram's studies

A typical male subject volunteering to take part in Milgram's early experiments at
Yale University in 1963 is greeted by a stem-looking experimenter in a white coat.
He finds that another subject has already arrived. The experimenter informs the two
men that they are to take part in an experiment to discover the effect of punishment
on learning and verbal memory. One subject will be the `teacher' and the other the
`learner' during the session. The allocation of the respective roles is decided by
lottery.
The two men are told that the teacher is to read pairs of words to the leaner and then
test the learner's memory by giving the first word of each pair and asking him to
supply the second word. Incorrect answers are punished by an electric shock
administered by the teacher by depressing one of 30 switches located on a `shock
generator' in front of him. These switches are arranged in a row and are labeled
according to the voltage they transmit to an electrode strapped to the learner's arm.
The first switch is labeled 15 volts, the second 30 volts, the third 45 volts and so on.
The final switch is labeled 450 volts. There are also a number of descriptive labels on
the switch panel. For example, `Slight Shock' describes the 15-16 volt range and the
435 to 450 volt range is labeled `XXX'.

91

Group Dynamics

The experimenter tells the teacher that he is to punish the learner's first recall error
with an electric shock of 15 volts. The second error is to be punished by a shock of
30 volts, and so on until the learner has correctly memorized the list of word pairs.
Before the session begins, the learner is strapped to a chair, his arm is treated with an
electrically conductive paste to which an electrode is then attached. He mentions to
the experimenter that learner has mild heart condition. Her is assured that the shocks,
although painful, will not result in any permanent tissue damage.
Then the teacher is escorted to an adjacent room where the shock generator is
situated. The experiment begins. The experimenter sits a few yards behind the
teacher to remind him that every error must be punished by increasingly severe
electric shocks.
During a typical session the learner makes an error in approximately three out of
four responses and the teacher steadily increases the shock level. At 75 volts the
teacher hears the learner moan `ugh'. At 150 volts the learner calls out `Ugh'
Experimenter, get me out of here. I told you I had heart trouble. My heart's starting
to bother me now. Get me out of here, please. My heart's starting to bother me. I
refuse to go on. Let me out"
The experimenter ignores these pleas and urges the teacher to. continue. At 210
volts, the learner demands to be let out. Still the experimenter urges the teacher to
continue until all the word pairs are learned. At 300 volts prolonged agonized
screaming can be heard and the learner shouts in desperation that he will no longer
provide answers. The experimenter tells the teacher that silence represents an error
and must be punished.
In the first two experiments 64 per cent of teachers administered the maximum
shock of 450 volts.
In fact the learner was an accomplice trained to play the role and no electric shocks
were administered. However, the actual subjects - the teachers - were completely
unaware of this. As Milgram states:
There is overwhelming evidence that the great majority of subjects, both obedient
and defiant, accepted the victims' reactions as genuine. The evidence takes the form
of : (a) tension created in the subjects; (b) scores on `estimated' pain (c) subjects'
accounts of their feelings in post-experimental interviews; and (d) quantifiable
responses to questionnaires distributed to subjects several months after their
participation in the experiment.
Experimental Variations
Greatly surprised by their initial findings, Milgram and his research team carried out
numerous variations of the basic experimental design in order to ascertain the key
situational factors governing the dynamics of obedience. These are summarized
below. Note that, unless otherwise stated, all experiments were based on the basic
design outlined above and used male subjects. Full obedience rates refer to the
percentage of subjects and administering the maximum of 450 volts.

Peer administers shock: similar to basic design except the teacher reads out the
word pairs and another volunteer administers the shocks on his behalf Full
obedience rate 92%.

Women as subjects: similar to basic design except that both teacher and learner
are female.
Full obedience rate = 64%.
Institutional context: the original experimental design repeated in a rather
shabby downtown building, ostensibly by an organization called Research
Associates of Bridgeport.
Full obedience rate = 48%.

92

Increased proximity: similar to basic design except the learner is

placed in the same room as teacher at a distance of meter.
Full obedience rate = 40%.

Touch proximity; as above but learner receives shock only when his hand is
forced onto a Obedience plate by the teacher.
Full obedience rate = 30%.

An `ordinary' man gives the orders: experimenter selects one of the volunteers
(a secret accomplice) to take his place. Experimenter remains in room as silent
observer.
Full obedience rate = 20%.
Distant authority: experimenter leaves room halfway through the experiment. He
explains he will be gone some time and asks the teacher to continue the
experiment in his absence.
Full obedience rate = 20%.

Two peers rebel: three teachers participate. Halfway through the experiment,
two of them (secret accomplices of the experimenter) refuse to continue
administering electric shocks.
Full obedience rate = 12%.

Contradictory authority: two experimenters. One behaves as in basic design, the

other expresses concern about the health of the learner and the legitimacy of his
colleague's authority.
Full obedience rate = 2%.

Subjects are free to choose the shock level they administer.

Full obedience rate = 2%.

Learner demands to be shocked.

Full obedience rate = 2%.
The results came as an unwelcome surprise both to the researchers themselves and to
many other presumably sophisticated observers. Most experts had foreseen that very
few subjects would push the shock buttons all the way to the maximum. In fact, about
50% followed orders to the hilt, even while believing that they were inflicting very
severe electric shock on a screaming middle age man with a heart ailment (something
close to that figure holds up for different kinds of people). And the persons giving
that orders had no "real" power. He was just a guy in a white coat running the
experiment.
What those experiments suggest that people have strong propensity to obey authority.
It is not just because we fear sanctions - like getting fired that most of us obey orders.
We seem to obey anybody who wears even simplest trappings of authority (in this
case white lab coat). Even it is obvious that no different sanctions could be imposed
on us for refusal to obey we must fuss and complain, but to disturbing and
frightening extent, we also obey.
Perhaps, then, we must be careful as managers in assuming that our organization run
smoothly because we are such great managers, such effective users of authority.
Rather they run because our subordinates were taught, long before they came to work
for, to obey authority. May be we are not as masterfully authoritative as we would
like to believe. Those people in fact would obey anybody. And if that is true, perhaps
we should be more concerned about how not to use authority than how to use it.
Perhaps we should encourage our subordinates to question our authority and to think
for themselves before they obey that order. It is only through such learning
experience we can create a condition by which people will learn to assume personal
responsibility for their actions. This is an essential condition by which people can be
transformed from being dependent to independent and interdependent.
Many managers believe that it is too easy to use authority, and this misunderstanding
arise because many of us often confuse between positional authority and authority. These
two are not same, they are different. From this confusion arise the belief that authority is
very simple to use. Authority in true sense originates from the word "author", in other
words creating. A person who has started an enterprise is a creative person, he has more
authority than the managers he has employed to achieve results through people. The
entrepreneur who has originally started the business has authority, and the employed
managers have positional authority. Positional authority has some amount of coercion
with it. How it is simple to spank

Conformity and
Obedience

93

Group Dynamics

94

a child who misbehaves, and how difficult and complicated it is to distract the child,
provide substitute satisfaction, or explain the situation. Given a hundred children it
is much easier to keep them in line by punishing few recalcitrant than teaching them
all to "feel responsible". And we cannot ignore the fact that exerting authority is
personally gratifying to superiors, and therefore attractive. The exercise of discipline
over others can be reassuring to those who need reassurance about themselves.
Moreover authority fits neatly with organizational superior's needs if they have any,
to blow off aggression arising from their own frustration. When parents spank the
child they don't just want to change the child's behavior but provide themselves with
an outlet for tensions built up in them, by their boss, or spouse, or the irritating,
troublesome child.
Similarly, authority is sometimes seen, perhaps properly, as a way for organizational
superiors to guarantee their superiority. If your subordinates know that you can and
will punish readily, they are likely to behave respectfully and submissively, at least in
your presence. The reassurance derived from these visible demonstration of respect
may represent great distortion of true feelings, but can be helpful to the superior's
own uncertain psyche.
Positional authority has another kind of advantage i.e. speed. A do-it-or-else order
eliminates the time consuming dilly-dallying of fedback. But speed may cost
accuracy and morale. Where these issues are not critical, speed may be worth its cost.
Positional authority, also has the advantage of imposing orderliness and-conformity
in an organization. Large number of people can be made to conform to fundamental
regulations: manager must make sure4 that his people stay through required eight
hours of the day. Even though the great majority may conform without external
threat, the superior has to guarantee minimum conformity by all employees. The job
of obtaining willing or self-imposed conformity without threat may just look too big
to handle. Moreover, such enforced discipline looks efficient because it can be used
on large number of people at the same time, even when one doesn't know much about
these people.
To instill obedience and conformity in the work situation managers have to use
power. Any discussion of power usually begins and sometimes ends with the five
categories of the sources of power identified by social psychologists John French and
Bertram Raven. Describing and analyzing these five classic types of power (reward;
coercive, legitimate, referent, and expert) serves as a necessary foundation.
Reward Power. This source of power depends on the person's having the ability and
resources to reward others. In addition, the target of this power must value these
rewards. In an organizational context, managers have many potential rewards, such
as pay increases, promotions, favorable work assignments, more responsibility, new
equipment, praise, feedback, and recognition available to them. In operant learning
terms; this means that the manager has the power to administer positive
reinforcement. In expectancy motivation terms, this means that the person has the
power to provide positive valences and that the other person recognizes this ability.
To understand this source of power more completely, one must remember that the
recipient holds the key. If managers offer subordinates what they think is a reward
(for example, a promotion with increased responsibility), but subordinates do not
value it (for example, they are insecure or have family obligations that are more
important to them than promotion), then managers do not really have reward power.
By the same token, managers may not think they are giving a reward to subordinates
(they listen with patience to employee problems), but if subordinates perceive this as
rewarding (the managers are giving them attention by intently listening to their
problems), the managers nevertheless have reward power. Also, managers may not
really have the rewards to dispense (they may say that they have considerable
influence with top management to get their people promoted, but actually they
don't), but as long as their people think that they have it, they do indeed have reward
power.
Coercive Power. This source of power depends on fear. The person with coercive
power has the ability to inflict punishment or aversive consequences on the other
person or, at least, to make threats that the other person believes will result in
punishment or undesirable outcomes. This form of power has contributed greatly to
negative connotation that power has for most

people. In an organizational context, managers frequently have coercive power in that

they can fire or demote subordinates or stop their pay, although the legal climate and
unions have stripped away some of this power. Management can also directly or
indirectly threaten an employee with these punishing consequences. In operant
learning terms, this means that the person has the power to administer punishments or
negatively reinforce (terminate punishing consequences, which is a form of negative
control). In expectancy motivation terms, this means that power comes from
expectation on the part of the other persons that they will be punished if they do not
conform to the powerful person's desires. For example, there is a fear of punishment
if they do not follow the rules, directives or policies of the organization. It is probably
this fear that gets most people to come to work on time and look busy when the boss
walks through the area. In other words, much of impression management behavior
may be explained in terms of coercive power than reward power.

Conformity and
Obedience

Legitimate Power. This power source, identified by French and Raven, stems from
the internalized values of the other persons that give the legitimate right to the agent
to influence them. The others feel that they have the obligation to accept this power.
It is almost identical to what is usually called positional authority and is closely
aligned with both reward and coercive power in that it does not depend on the
relationships with others but rather on the position or role that the person holds. For
example, people obtain legitimacy because of their title (captain or executive vice
president) or position (oldest in the family or officer of a corporation) rather than
their personalities or how they affect others.
Legitimate power can come from three major sources. First, the prevailing cultural
values of a society, organization, or group determine what is legitimate. For example,
in some societies, the older people become the more legitimate power they possess.
The same may be true for a certain physical attribute, gender, or job. In an
organizational context, managers generally have legitimate power because employees
believe in the value of private property laws and in the hierarchy where higher
positions have been designed to have power over lower positions. The same holds
true for certain functional positions in an organization. An example of the latter
would, be engineers who have- legitimacy in the operations area of a company, while
accountants have legitimacy in financial matters. The prevailing values within a
group also determine legitimacy. For example, in a street gang the toughest member
may have legitimacy, while in a work group the union steward may have legitimacy.
Second, people can obtain legitimate power from the accepted social structure. In
some societies there is an accepted ruling class. But an organization or a family may
also have an accepted social structure that gives legitimate power. For example, when
blue-collar workers accept employment from a company, they are in effect accepting
the hierarchical structure and granting legitimate power to their supervisors.
A third source of legitimate power can come from being designated as the agent or
representative of a powerful person or group. Elected officials, a chairperson of a
committee, and a member of the board of directors of a corporation or a union or
management committee would be examples of this forf of legitimate power.
Each of these forms of legitimate power creates an obligation to accept and be
influenced.
But in actual practice, there are often problems, confusion, or disagreement about the
range or scope of this power.
These gray areas point to the real concern that many people in contemporary society
have regarding the erosion of traditional legitimacy. These uncertainties also point to
the complex nature of power.
Referent Power. This type of power comes from the desire on the part of the other
persons to identify with the agent wielding power. They want to identify with the
powerful person, regardless of the outcomes. The others grant person power because
he or she is attractive and has desirable resources or personal characteristics.
Advertisers take advantage of this type of power when they use celebrities, such as
movie stars or sports figures, to do testimonial advertising.

95

Group Dynamics

96

The buying public identifies with (finds attractive) certain famous people and grants
them power to tell them what product to buy. For example, arguments, especially
emotional ones, are more influential when they come from beautiful people, is a
common experience in the field of commercial advertisement.
Timing is an interesting aspect of the testimonial advertising type of referent power.
Only professional athletes who are in season (for example, cricket players in the
winter and football players in the summer) are used in the advertisements, because
then they are very visible, they are in the forefront of public's awareness, and
consequently they have referent power. Exceptions, of course, are the handful of
superstars who transcend seasons and have referent power all year long, and even
after they have retired.
In an organizational setting, referent power is much different from the other types of
power discussed so far. For example, managers with referent power are attractive to
subordinates so that subordinates will want to identify with them, regardless of
whether the managers have the ability to reward or punish or whether they have the
legitimacy. In other words, the manager who depends on referent power must be
personally attractive to subordinates.
Expert Power. The last source of power identified by French and Raven is based on
the extent to which others attribute knowledge and expertise on the power seeker.
Experts are perceived to have knowledge or understanding only in certain welldefined areas. All the sources of power depend on the target's perceptions, but expert
power may be even more dependent on this than the others. In particular, the target
must perceive the agent to be credible, trustworthy, and relevant before expert power
is granted.
Credibility comes from having the right credentials; that is, the person must really
know what he or she is talking about and be able to show tangible evidence of this
knowledge. There is basic research indicating he significant positive impact that
credibility has on perceived power and much evidence from every day experience.
For example, if a highly successful cricket coach gives an aspiring young player
some .advice on how to defend googly, he will be closely listened to - he will be
granted expert power. The coach has expert power in this case because he is so
knowledgeable about cricket. His evidence for this credibility is the fact that he is a
former star player and has coached champion teams. If this coach tried to give advice
on how to play basketball or how to manage a corporation, he would have no
credibility and thus would have no expert power. For avid cricket fans or players,
however, this coach might have general referent power (that is, he is very attractive
to them), and they would be influenced by what he has to say on any subject basketball or corporate management.
In organizations, staff specialists have expert power in their functional areas but not
outside them. For example, technicians are granted expert power in technical matters
but not in personnel or public relations problems. The same holds true for other staff
experts, such as computer experts or accountants. For example, the young accountant
in an office may be the only one who really understands the newest financial
software and how to use it, and this knowledge gives him or her considerable power.
As already implied, however, expert power is highly selective, and besides
credibility, the agent must have trustworthiness and relevance. By trustworthiness, it
is meant that the person seeking expert power must have a reputation for being
honest and straightforward. In the case of political figures, scandals could undermine
their expert power in the eyes of the voting public. In addition to credibility and
trustworthiness, a person must have relevance and usefulness to have expert power.
Going back to the earlier example, if the cricket coach gave advice on world affairs,
it would be neither relevant nor useful, and therefore the coach would not have expert
power.
It is evident that expertise is the most tenuous 'type of power, but managers and
especially staff specialists, who seldom have the other sources of power available to
them, often have to depend upon their expertise as their only source of power. As
organizations become increasingly technologically complex and specialized, the
expert power of the organization members at all levels may become more and more
important. This is formally recognized by some companies that deliberately include
lower level staff with expert power in top-level

decision making, in other words, they, mix `knowledge-power people' with positionpower people' daily, so that together they make the decisions that will help them to cope
with rapid changes taking place in the market.
It must also be remembered that French and Raven did recognize that there may be other,
sources of power. For instance, some organizational sociologists such as Crozier
recognize the source of power of task interdependence where two or more organizational
participants must depend on one another). An example would be an executive who has
legitimate power over a subordinate, but because the executive must depend on the
subordinate to get the job done correctly on time, the subordinate also has power over the
executive. There is research evidence indicating that subordinates in such an
interdependent relationship with their boss receive better pay raises and even that such
interdependence can enhance the quality of the professor-student relationship. French and
Raven also point out that the sources are interrelated (for example, the use of coercive
power by managers may reduce their referent power and there is research evidence that
high coercive and reward power may lead to reduced expert power), and the same person
may exercise different types of power under different circumstances and at different
times. The latter point has recently led to some contingency models of power in
organizations.
Need to look for alternate source of power
Positional authority which is rooted in the employment contract itself is very limited in
scope. Since it only obligates employees to perform duties assign to them in accordance
with minimum standards. Therefore, use of positional authority alone does not make
people devote much effort on their own or exercise initiative in carrying it out. Thus it
shows that effective management is not possible within the confines of positional
authority alone.
The power process helps circumscribe idiosyncratic behavior and keeps it conferment to
the rational plan of the organization. Any organization, for the survival requires certain
amount of conformity as well as the integration of diverse activities of its members. The
co-ordination and order created out of the diverse and sometimes conflicting interest and.
potentially diffused behavior of its members is largely a function of power.
The increasing number and complexity of organizations in modem industrial societies
require large number of persons with a high level of technical and administrative
expertise to play leadership roles. The demand for expert leaders reduces the suitability of
those recruited on the basis of social status or family connections. Achievement replaced
ascription as the basis for placing leaders, and their recruitment spreads to all strata of
society. Similarly, political criteria, prevalent as the basis of recruitment during early
stages in newly independent and even in revolutionary societies, becomes less
meaningful. At the same time, training center for leaders are established in universities,
business schools, and training institutes, and the possibility for career in industrial
leadership is evenly distributed within the society. Management has become
professionalised. Although these developments are most apparent in business and
industrial organizations and in some government agencies, they are also occurring in
other organizations, including the military and labor unions.
Most of these changes imply a rationalization of the power process in organizations
consistent with Max Weber's bureaucratic model. However, further changes in the way
leaders exercise power are likely to accompany this rationalization, and these represent a
divergence from a classical bureaucratic model. Leaders may rely on discussion and
persuasion rather than on command exclusively. Attempts are made to elicit cooperation,
sometimes by having organization members participate in the making of decisions that
affect them in the work place. The rising level of education of the work force represents
an important "constraint" that contributes to this trend. In addition, the specialized skills
that are frequently required of persons at all levels in modern organizations may
sometimes mean that subordinates are more expert in a particular specialization than their
superiors, thus modifying the classical supervisory-subordinate relationship. Furthermore,
professional managers are more inclined than their predecessors to consider the results of
social science research, which has supported the growth of human-relations approaches to
control in organizations. At the same time, political developments, particularly in some
Asian and European countries, have led to the introduction of schemes of co-management
and of worker's councils, with varying degree of

Conformity and
Obedience

97

Group Dynamics

success. These developments may not be fully consolidated in any contemporary society,
but incipient support at least, can be found in many organizations for less autocratic
control than was customary in the past. A survey in fourteen developed and developing
nations (including India), for example, shows that managers overwhelmingly subscribe at
least to the idea of ' participation by workers in decision making. They, however, express
skepticism about the capacity of the workers to assume the responsibilities consonant
with democratic leadership (Haire et. Al. 1966).
Taken together, these developments imply the growth-actual in some places, potential in
other - of new kinds of control in addition to those prevalent in the past.. Partly as a
consequence of this and of developments in research, conceptions of the power process
have been broadened.
First, a change has taken place in the analyses of the bases of power. Coercion has played
a prominent role in traditional analysis, consistent with the presumed conflict between
leaders and followers. Leaders are obeyed out of fear of punishment or hope for reward.
Weber, however, argues that the stability of social systems depends on acceptance by
followers of the right of leaders to exercise control. This implied legitimate authority, and
Weber defines three types: (1) "Charismatic" authority, according to which leaders are
thought to be endowed with extraordinary, sometimes magical powers. Charisma on the
part of a leader elicits obedience out of awe. It is illustrated in its pure form by "the
prophet, the warrior hero, the great demagogue". (2) "Traditional" authority, appertains to
those who have the right to rule by virtue of birth or class. The traditional leader is
obeyed because he or members of his class or family have always been followed. Its pure
type is illustrated by certain patriarchs, monarchs, and feudal lords. (3) "Legal" authority
applies to those who hold leadership positions because of demonstrated technical
competence. Legal authorities act impersonally as instruments of the law, and they are
obeyed impersonally out of a sense of duty to the law. Leadership in the legal
bureaucracy is based exclusively on legal authority.
Simon, however, points to the importance of social approval. Approval and disapproval
represent forms of reward and punishment, but they deserve special consideration because
they are frequently dispensed, not only by the designated leader, but also by others. Thus,
a subordinate may obey a supervisor, not so much because of the rewards and punishment
meted out by the supervisor, as because of the approval and disapproval by the
subordinate's own peers. Confidence may represent a further basis for acceptance of
leader's authority. A subordinate may trust the judgement and therefore accept the
authority of the leader in areas where the leader has great technical competence. French
and Raven make a further distinction between the influence of a leader based on
confidence by subordinate in the leader's expert knowledge and "informational influence"
based on acceptance by subordinates of the logic of the arguments that the leader offers.
An expert leader, then, may exercise control, not simply because he is an acknowledged
authority, but because his decisions, being based on expertise, are manifestly logical,
appropriate, and convincing. Subordinates are convinced that the decisions are correct.
This is related to some human-relations approaches that stress control by facts as opposed
to control by men. Such "fact control" relies on understanding, and is illustrated by the
participative leader who influences the behavior of subordinates by helping them
understand the facts of a situation so that they may jointly arrive at a course of action
consistent with their own interests and that of the collectively. Some of these conceptions
represent radical departure from many traditional ones, assuring, as they do, an over-riding
communality of interests among all members of the organization.

98

Other researchers have defined power as the ability to encourage or force others to act in
accordance with ones own wishes in order to bring to fruition ones personal goals or
aspirations. Zald (1970) maintains the concept of deliberate or intentional control of others
behavior but calls attention to a different purpose of the exercise of that power. He defines
power as the ability of a person or group, for whatever reason, to effect another person's or
group's ability to achieve its own goals (person or collection). In this definition therefore,
attention is focused not on the source's attempting to satisfy his own goals but rather on
sources ability to get Target to satisfy Target's goals. Others have been more liberal in
their definition of power, simply indicating that any interference with autonomy is power,
differing only in terms of the sanctions that source can bring to bear on Target for non
compliance. All

the definitions under this category perceived the locus (or cause) of power as residing
in one person, the source, who is capable of generating change in the Target.
Psychologists too are generally given to claiming that power resides in the Source by
virtue of that person's ability to marshal greater resources in the eventuality of the
conflict. Most of the theories have a rather "chief chicken in the barnyard" flavor
about them. Research carried out by the psychologists usually reflects this initial bias
by. assuming that power resides in the source. One can "find in many laboratory or
field experimental situations that the ability of Target to react to an influence or
power attempt is severely limited to the purpose of experimental control. In
laboratory situation, for example, experimental subjects defined as Targets may only
be offered two or three potential courses of actions when exposed to an influence
attempt. They may, for example, be able to resist the attempt or to comply with the
attempt either partially or totally. It is perfectly obvious that such experimental
procedures lead to the maintenance of the myopia of linear causality. The entire
experimental procedure is structured to examine the power that resides in the Source"
(Swingle, 1976).
A variation in the conception of power relates to the mutuality - unilaterally of
control. A view common to traditional analysts argues that the control process is
unilateral; one leads or is led, is strong or weak, controls or is controlled. Simnel, in
spite of his general adherence to the traditional conflict view of power, noted a more
subtle interaction underlying the appearance of "pure superiority" on the part of one
person and the "purely passive being led" of another. "All leaders are also led, in
innumerable cases the master is the slave of his slaves" (Wolff, 1950). Contemporary
analysts are more likely than earlier ones to consider relationships of mutual as well
as unilateral power, of followers influencing leaders, and vice versa.
Finally, traditional analysis of social power assumes that the total amount of power in
a system is a fixed quantity and that leaders and followers are engaged in a "zero sum
game": increasing the power of one party must be accompanied by the corresponding
decrease in the power of the other. Some social scientists are now inclined to
question the generality of this assumption, and it is believed that the total amount of
power in a system may grow, and leaders and followers may therefore enhance their
power jointly. Total power may also decline, and all groups within the system may
suffer corresponding decreases. In the contemporary times major challenge of the
managers is to increase total, power in the relationships structure in work
organizations. For this they have no other alternative but look for ways and means of
empowering people around, and not to be concerned with conformity and obedience
from their subordinates.
Human beings show an eternal desire to be able to reestablish routines that are
predictable, maintain their confidence about performing well, and reaffirm, and
reaffirm their sense of personal control in the work setting. Otherwise, in the absence
of such conditions, uncertainty prevails. Uncertainty leads to the experience of
aversive feelings of loss, anxiety, and lack of control. When people feel that they
have little hope of reducing uncertainty or reasserting control, they tend to develop
feelings of helplessness. Attribution of lack of control even to global factors leads to
generalization of helplessness symptoms across situations.
Feeling of helplessness leads to many dysfunctional behavior syndromes in the
individual, which has negative consequences on the performance, and on the work
organization where the individual is employed. Helplessness often causes depression,
lack of motivation, cognition, and emotion. More importantly, as the experimental
researches indicate, the individual tends to generalize such feelings to new situations
when uncontrollability no longer exists. Such feelings, specially among the
organizational members prove to be too costly for any organization, since it is these
very people who are important and responsible for the continuance, growth, and
development of any organization. Probably, it is due to this realization that the
managers always enjoy more power and authority so that things remain predictable to
them. In fact, loss of power, and erosion of authority are the two major . indicators of
helplessness.
A work culture characterized by obedience and conformity have strong potentiality to
generate helplessness among the organizational members. As a result people become unable
to give the best to the organization. Therefore, there is a strong need to examine obsessive

Conformity and
Obedience

99

Group Dynamics

concern for obedience since that may lead to the feeling of helplessness. Overcoming
helplessness will go a long way in instilling confidence both to the organization and
the organizational members.

4.10 WHY AND HOW OF EMPOWERMENT

Erosion of authority is a phenomenon permeating the contemporary Indian society,
For quite sometime, we have witnessed people showing utter contempt and disregard
for authority - it is being questioned, disputed, resented, and also challenged. Work
organizations, being a part of the larger, society, cannot shield themselves from the
impact of such an onslaught. As a sequel, we hear managers complaining about
reduced power. They experience reduced power because of the erosion of positional
authority, which is a major constituent of managerial power following French and
Ravens topology. Along with this, responsibility and accountability of an individual
manager is also increasing substantially, and so is his span of control. In such a
changed situation of increased responsibility, coupled with reduced authority, the
managers have many options to follow. One approach could be to increase one's
power substantially by creating dependency in others. (Das and Cotton, 1988). The
second approach is to "turning the so called followers into leaders". This is possible to
achieve by empowering those who are deprived of power. Empowering seems to be
beneficial in the work situation, as many researchers have observed that deprivation
of power generate hostility, suspicion, and lack of commitment to what goes on in the
organization. Whereas in work organizations by design, members in the higher
echelons enjoy more power than people below, and the members from lower category
are deprived of power. Arising out of such understanding is the concern for
empowering the subordinates as a contributing factor of managerial and
organizational effectiveness. It has been observed that the empowered subordinates
develop a sense of competence, voluntarily share the superior's responsibility,
participate in the change process, and assume personal responsibility.
Empowering subordinates has taken various forms in India over the years. Some
reflections of empowering attempts can be seen in the efforts to involve the
employees in decision-making; in other words, participative forms of management.
In participation, power is shared. Sharing power is a lower form of empowering. As
early as 1918, TISCO management made the first attempt to involve workers in
management. Subsequently, in 1921, the Government of West Bengal urged the
industries in setting up workers' committees as a remedial action to prevent industrial
unrest. After that, different mechanisms were developed to democratize the work
environment in the Indian organizations. Among these, work committees set up in
1947, joint management councils, in 1957, workers' directors, in 1970, and shop and
joint councils setup in 1975 are noteworthy.
Several researchers claim that participative management was a miserable failure in
India. According to some the main reasons for the failure of participative
management, among others, are: employer managers are skeptical about the
capability of participating workmen, employer-managers believed that decisionmaking was their prerogative, and sharing power is equivalent to reducing one's own
power.

100

In recent years, quality circle (QC) has become quite popular in the Indian work
organizations. Quality circle has many elements in it which lead to empowerment.
For example, allowing a group to find solution to their own problem rather than to
depend upon others for advice, has distinct possibility of increasing a strong sense of
efficacy, leading to empowerment. However, there is some basic difference between
the concept and practice of participative form of management and quality circle. The
former always enjoyed the blessings of the powers-that-be, they always came as a
part of the legislation or a government scheme. Whereas, participation in QC is more
of a voluntary nature, and so far no government directive has been handed about QC
(so good!). It is nonetheless, necessary to remember that quality circle too, like
participative management, has encountered severe setbacks. These two traditional
ways of empowering although do enhance the feeling of self efficacy among
organizational members, the approach is basically formal and structural. The way
innumerable well-intentioned government sponsored schemes fail in India is any

indication, this sphere also was no exception. Nonetheless, there is a growing demand
to know about the other ways of empowering people at the work place, because of its
inherent benefits.
However, empowering is also possible through informal social processes employed
many senior organizational members. Singh, Bhandarker (1990), in their study on
corporate success, have highlighted the importance of. empowering leadership used
by successful corporate chief executives. The authors observed that empowering
management style "reduces anxiety, increases security and confidence, and
encourages people to accept change and actively participate in it". All these five
corporate executives' main concern was not to make people do something but to make
their process of doing it possible, enable others, and enhance others' sense of
competence. The mechanism used for empowering is not by the introduction of
systems and procedures but mainly through informal social processes. On similar
lines, it has also been empirically demonstrated that employee motivation at work is,
to a considerable extent, a function of social influence attempts made by
organizational agents.
One form of empowering in the work organization through informal social process
can be easily perceived in the mentor protege relationships. Several studies of this
relationship strongly indicate that it can be instrumental in supporting both, career
advancement and personal growth. Mentors provide basically two types of functions
- career enhancing functions,- and psychological functions. The functions, such as
sponsorship, coaching, facilitating, exposure and visibility, offering, challenging
work, and protection are included under career enhancing functions. In the
psychological domain, the mentor offers role modeling, confirmation, counseling,
and friendship. Whereas career functions enhance the possibility of career
enhancement, psychological functions enhance the sense of competence, clarity of
identity, and role effectiveness of a protege.
Mentors, through their inter-personal relationships, enable, the proteges to develop
and grow in their organizational life. In some cultures, for example, the Japanese, the
relationship between superior-subordinate fulfills all the requirements of mentorprotege relationships.
Based on Bandura's (1977, 1986) self efficacy model, Conger, Kanugo (1988)
demonstrate the empowerment in work situation helps feelings of self efficacy among
organizational members. However, the authors are more interested to ensure that the
informal social process in enhancing self efficacy beliefs should be meshed with
formal organizational policies and practices.
In the present competitive environment the onus lies with the manager to show
results to demonstrate his effectiveness. Towards this objective it may be necessary
for a manager to look beyond authority and power. The time has come when a
manager is to be more concerned with encouraging self efficacy belief in their
subordinates, to ensure that the subordinates assume personal responsibility etc. than
merely ensuring obedience from their subordinates. This is only possible by learning
new skills in empowering people. In a factor analytic. study (Das, 1992) it has been
observed that for empowering the subordinates managers have to basically
demonstrate three sets of behaviors. The first set of behavior has been described as
"giving exposure, visibility, and protection", and the second set has been described as
"facilitating career advancement". These two sets of behavior are oriented towards
developing the subordinates and helping them in career advancement. The third
factor has been named as "acceptance and encouragement", which has a potentiality
in enhancing interpersonal bondage.

Conformity and
Obedience

4.11 SUMMARY
Conformity and freedom, obedience and empowerment has been a constant source of
conflict since the inception of civilization, Having defined conformity and obedience
this unit explains in detail ten situational factors that influence an individual's response
to group conformity pressures. Moving further in this unit we have explained the
dynamics of responses to the group pressures in the form of Compliance and
Identification. Conformity, Compliance and Identification are relatively transient
responses to group pressure but internalization is not. The satisfaction given by
internalisation is intense, this allows the influence to become

101

Group Dynamics

independent of the source and an integral part of the internalizer. Further this unit
explains in detail Milgram's study on the dynamics of obedience to authority.
To instill obedience and conformity in the work situation managers have to use power.
This unit has explained the five categories of the sources of power identified by John
French and Bertram Raven viz., Reward Power, Coercive Power, Legitimate Power,
Referent Power and Expert Power, alongwith the need for looking at alternative
sources of power. Towards the end this unit has touched upon the outcome of the
dynamics of power in the organization and coping strategies against the expected
results i.e. why and how of empowerment,

4.12 Self Assessment Questions

1.
2.
3.
4.

What do you understand by the term conformity; explain? Describe the

situational factors that influence an individual's response to group conformity.
Compliance is another possible response to the influence a group can exert".
Elaborate this statement, explain the underlying concept.
Explain the experiment and important outcomes of Milgram's study on the
dynamics of obedience and authority.
Write short notes on the following:
Reward Power
(i)
Legitimate Power
(ii)
(iii) Referent power
(iv) Expert power

4.13 FURTHER READINGS

Bandura A : Social Foundations of Thought and Action': A Social Cognitive View.
Englewood Cliffs, N.J., Prentice-Hall, 1986.
Bandura A: Self efficacy: Towards a unifying theory of behavioural change.
Psychological Review 84, 191-215, 1977.
Bennis W G, Nanus B: Leaders. New York, Harper&Row,1985.
Conger J A, Kanungo R N: The empowerment process: integrating theory and
practice.
Academy of Management Review 13(3), 471-82, 1988.
Crozier, M. -- The Bureaucratic Phenomenon. University of Chicago Press, Chicago,
1964.
Das G S : Development of an Empowering Scale: Item Analysis and Factor
Structure. ASCI Journal of Management, Vol 22 No 2-3 Sept-Dec 1992.
Das GS, Cotton CC: Power balancing styles of Indian managers. Human Relations,
14(7), 533-51, 1988.
French, J.R.P., and Raven, B. - The bases of social power. In D.Cartwright (ed)
Studies in Social Power, University of Michigan, Institute for Social Research, Ann
Arber, 1959. Haire, M., Ghiselli, E., and Porter L. - Managerial Thinking, Wiley,
New York, 1966.
Luthans, F. - Organisational Behaviour. (86 edition)m Urwi Mcgrawhill, Boston,
1998.
Simon, H.A. - Authority. In Arannaberg, C.M., Barkin, 5., Chalmers, W.E. Wilensky,
H.L., Worthy, J.C., , and Dennis, B.D. (eds.). Research in Industrial Human
Relations. Harpar and Brothers, New York, 1957.
Singh P. Bhandarker A : Corporate Success: Transformational Leadership.
New Delhi, Wiley Eastern, 1990.
Swingle,P.G. - The Management of Power. Lawrence Erlbaun Associates Publishers,
Hillsdale, New Jersey, 1976.
Weber, M. - The theory of Social and Economic Organisation. Oxford University
Press, New York, 1947.
Wolff, K.H. (Edited and Translated) - The Sociology of Georg Simmel. Free Press,
New York, 1950.
Zald, M.N. - Political economy: A Framework for comparative analysis. In Zald,
M.N. (ed) Power in Organisation, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, 1970,
anderbilt University, Nashville, 1970,

102