Content uploaded by Joshua Dubrow
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Joshua Dubrow on Jul 05, 2015
Content may be subject to copyright.
A preview of the PDF is not available
How Do Elites Define Influence? Personality and Respect as Sources of Social Power
Abstract
How well do theories of elites' sources of social power match the reality as perceived by the elites themselves? Using data from interviews with 312 elites from a large midwestern American city, and employing an inductive coding method situated in grounded theory, we use the constructivist approach in listening to elites' definitions of their sources of social power. Integrating Weber's notion of charisma and the interactionist literature on power, we hypothesize that interpersonal attributes can be crucial in micro-level power negotiations. Our analyses reveal that along with mentioning economic and political resources, institutional and organizational position, and connectedness in influence networks—themes common in elite theory—elites also identify the interpersonal attributes of personality and respect as sources of social power in their own right. Projection of positive personal attributes assists in the exercise of power; exposing traits with negative connotations can be a detriment. Elites display personal attributes while employing impression management, thus developing a social identity used to manipulate interpersonal relations. We conclude by offering a series of sensitizing principles to guide an understanding of how interpersonal sources of social power are used in elite power negotiations.
... The phenomenon of the elite and the concept of an elite itself are not without controversy, however-some people holding arguably powerful elite positions may be reluctant to describe themselves as privileged or having elite status (Ellersgaard et al., 2022)-and drawing boundaries between the elite and non-elite is a challenging task (Keller, 2018). Perhaps due to this contested nature of the very concept of an elite, and also the difficulties in approaching elite populations for research purposes (López, 2023), relatively few studies have been carried out to examine the selfperception and self-understanding of elite populations (Yamokoski & Dubrow, 2008). Taking a constructivist approach, Yamokoski and Dubrow (2008) used a semi-structured survey instrument to study a sample of local elites in a city in the US and analysed their self-described definition of sources of power. ...
... Perhaps due to this contested nature of the very concept of an elite, and also the difficulties in approaching elite populations for research purposes (López, 2023), relatively few studies have been carried out to examine the selfperception and self-understanding of elite populations (Yamokoski & Dubrow, 2008). Taking a constructivist approach, Yamokoski and Dubrow (2008) used a semi-structured survey instrument to study a sample of local elites in a city in the US and analysed their self-described definition of sources of power. The study found, for instance, that the interpersonal attributes of personality and respect are sources of power among the elite population, in addition to more commonly discussed sources of power, such as economic and political resources, organisational positions, and social networks. ...
This open access book unveils the hidden elite of Italy's third sector, offering a rare glimpse into the lives and minds of civil society's most influential leaders. Bridging elite and civil society studies, it presents pioneering research on these powerful yet understudied figures. Through in-depth analysis, the chapters reveal surprising insights about the elite's composition, attitudes, career trajectories, and views on power. Essential reading for scholars of democracy, civil society, and social policy, this volume challenges conventional wisdom about leadership in the nonprofit world. By illuminating the dynamics of Italy's third sector elite, it reshapes our understanding of civil society's role in modern democracies.
... The phenomenon of the elite and the concept of an elite itself are not without controversy, however-some people holding arguably powerful elite positions may be reluctant to describe themselves as privileged or having elite status (Ellersgaard et al., 2022)-and drawing boundaries between the elite and non-elite is a challenging task (Keller, 2018). Perhaps due to this contested nature of the very concept of an elite, and also the difficulties in approaching elite populations for research purposes (López, 2023), relatively few studies have been carried out to examine the selfperception and self-understanding of elite populations (Yamokoski & Dubrow, 2008). Taking a constructivist approach, Yamokoski and Dubrow (2008) used a semi-structured survey instrument to study a sample of local elites in a city in the US and analysed their self-described definition of sources of power. ...
... Perhaps due to this contested nature of the very concept of an elite, and also the difficulties in approaching elite populations for research purposes (López, 2023), relatively few studies have been carried out to examine the selfperception and self-understanding of elite populations (Yamokoski & Dubrow, 2008). Taking a constructivist approach, Yamokoski and Dubrow (2008) used a semi-structured survey instrument to study a sample of local elites in a city in the US and analysed their self-described definition of sources of power. The study found, for instance, that the interpersonal attributes of personality and respect are sources of power among the elite population, in addition to more commonly discussed sources of power, such as economic and political resources, organisational positions, and social networks. ...
This chapter examines the organisational landscape of elite civil society organisations in Italy at the national level, revealing a clear hierarchical structure dominated by a few top-tier organisations. These elite CSOs control the majority of resources and are primarily engaged in service provision, solidarity efforts, volunteering, and international aid, reflecting the broader orientation of the civil society sector. Two longstanding, broad-spectrum organisations stand out due to their historical significance, ideological roots, decision-making roles, public funding, and involvement in policy consultation. The next tier down includes influential networks representing the sector, major associations with national reach, Catholic service-oriented groups, and international organisations. A larger and more diverse group of CSOs focuses on narrower policy areas such as human rights, disability, international aid, solidarity/volunteering, and Catholic values, combining both service and advocacy roles. The ideological divide between Catholic and secular leftist groups remains prominent, echoing historical societal divisions. Elite organisations engage with various policy domains, integrating service provision with efforts towards systemic change. Their accumulation of economic and political resources creates a stratified organisational landscape, characterised by a distinct hierarchy.
... The phenomenon of the elite and the concept of an elite itself are not without controversy, however-some people holding arguably powerful elite positions may be reluctant to describe themselves as privileged or having elite status (Ellersgaard et al., 2022)-and drawing boundaries between the elite and non-elite is a challenging task (Keller, 2018). Perhaps due to this contested nature of the very concept of an elite, and also the difficulties in approaching elite populations for research purposes (López, 2023), relatively few studies have been carried out to examine the selfperception and self-understanding of elite populations (Yamokoski & Dubrow, 2008). Taking a constructivist approach, Yamokoski and Dubrow (2008) used a semi-structured survey instrument to study a sample of local elites in a city in the US and analysed their self-described definition of sources of power. ...
... Perhaps due to this contested nature of the very concept of an elite, and also the difficulties in approaching elite populations for research purposes (López, 2023), relatively few studies have been carried out to examine the selfperception and self-understanding of elite populations (Yamokoski & Dubrow, 2008). Taking a constructivist approach, Yamokoski and Dubrow (2008) used a semi-structured survey instrument to study a sample of local elites in a city in the US and analysed their self-described definition of sources of power. The study found, for instance, that the interpersonal attributes of personality and respect are sources of power among the elite population, in addition to more commonly discussed sources of power, such as economic and political resources, organisational positions, and social networks. ...
This chapter explores the subjective views and self-perceptions of top-level civil society leaders in Italy and Sweden regarding the general elite and the civil society elite. Drawing on data from the Civil Society Elite Survey study, it examines how civil society leaders define and delineate the boundaries between these two elite groups. The analysis uncovers both similarities and differences across national contexts, revealing nuanced understandings of elite status, power dynamics, and the normative underpinnings that shape civil society elites’ positioning within broader power structures. Civil society leaders often frame themselves as wielding mediated influence and emphasise the organisational context as a key determinant of their elite status. Furthermore, they employ a normative lens to associate their elite status with positive attributes aligned with civil society values, contrasting themselves against perceived negative characteristics of the general elite. While acknowledging their own elite status, civil society elites perceive themselves as a counterweight to dominant power structures, championing solidarity, social justice, and democratic participation.
... It is believed that Pareto and Mosca first proposed the law of elite rotation in 1935. In accordance with the aforementioned supposition and to bolster the argument, elite theory regards elites as players who control the state and national resources and hold significant positions within power networks (Yamokoski and Dubrow, 2008). One of the primary assumptions of elite theory is that every society has a minority that rules over the rest of society. ...
... It stresses on the personal attributes of leaders and the institutional framework of society. Contemporary elite theory defines elites as actors controlling resources, occupying key positions and relating through power networks (Yamokoski & Dubrow, 2008). This is closely related to the Marxian conception of the ruling class who own the means of production (Lopez, 2013) and also to the Weberian idea of power which is the ability to implement one"s will against those of others (Weber, 2005). ...
Every failed or collapsed state in the world has a history. Such history is often laden with indices of practices abhorred in other progressive and relatively peaceful states. Nigeria has become infamous for her retarded growth when placed side by side with other developing countries. The reasons for these are not in the blues rather are seen in the day to day activities of an average Nigerian not to mention the seeming institutionalization of decadence in the political structure and polity. This article is anchored on the elite theory so as to plausibly explain this precarious situation. The methodology employed is mainly the analysis of secondary data from journals, literature and documentaries, while also carrying out relevant empirical review. Findings revealed that Nigeria as an entity has experienced in good measure and at a very high rate the characteristics of a failed state some of which include lack of adequate security, corruption, human rights violation, lack of development, weak governance, poor administration, enduring social tensions, violent conflicts, ruins or memories of a civil war, lack of respect for rule of law and loss of legitimacy. The study recommends among others that there should be National Action Plan to guide development strategies, reformation of electoral laws, respect for rule of law, public participation in decision making and a fiscal federalism.
... Elite is a concept that is based on the notion that every society holds a ruling minority, a group that controls and disputes the most important power sources (Yamokoski & Dubrow, 2008). Therefore, according to these authors, these group's antagonistic relations are rooted in powers struggles. ...
Several factors have been offered to explain depressing economic development levels in Africa. The factors include colonial legacy, social pluralism, and its centrifugal tendencies, corrupt leaders, and limited inflow of foreign capital. While Lesotho shares some of the above challenges, it is more homogenous in terms of ethnicity, a remarkable departure from most African countries, south of the Sahara. Notwithstanding the insulation from inter-ethnic squabbles, Lesotho is not faring better in economic development due to internal conflicts within elite ranks for political power reminiscent of what is in other parts of Africa, albeit not on ethno-linguistic or cultural lines. This intra elite conflict has largely not been interrogated as a bane to development in Lesotho. This work makes use of prebendalism theory. Methodologically, the work used secondary data. The temporal scope is from 1993 to 2018. It is deduced that elite conflict has impacted negatively economic development in Lesotho.
Focussing in on how authors can censor themselves in digitally social spaces, this chapter highlights the interplay between external control and self-regulation. Online interactions among authors and readers are influenced by cultural norms, platform guidelines, and individual self-censorship. Within this, there are distinctions between hard censorship, soft censorship, and self-censorship, and how these forms shape the performance of authorship. This chapter also considers the role of algorithmic moderation by social media platforms and the impact of public censorship, where community norms and user reports can suppress voices. Through case studies and examples, the chapter reveals how authors navigate these challenges, often engaging in self-censorship to avoid backlash and maintain their public personas.
Disasters and disaster risks are social phenomena that take place in a political space shaped by different political ideologies. Despite this connection, the field of disaster risk management has been developed without a deliberate incorporation of political theories. Using a narrative literature review methodology, this paper sought to elucidate the significance of political theory in shaping both the policy and practice of disaster risk management. The review reveals notable intersections between political theories, such as elitism and pluralism, and established disaster risk management paradigms, specifically objectivism and constructivism. Notably, elitism and objectivism tend to promote expertise, marginalize citizen participation, and emphasize centralized disaster management, whereas pluralism and constructivism advocate for diversity, tolerance, and competition, aligning with the concept of disaster risk management. The paper argues that ignoring political theories in disaster risk management can conceal a deeper understanding of the power relations between different stakeholders, as well as the historical, economic, social, and political characteristics of a society. It advocates for future studies to examine the contributions of political theories explicitly and critically to disaster risk policies and practices. This call highlights the need for a deeper understanding of how political theories impact the effectiveness and equity of disaster risk management.
This chapter aims at analysing the inter-organisational networks emerging from interlocking leaders among the most resourceful, national-level civil society organisations (CSOs) in four European countries. By comparing four different country contexts, we analyse differences in the characteristics of networks, find different mechanisms that seem to structure organisational links across the cases, and identify who the most powerful actors are based on the CSOs’ network positions. While we find small components of tightly connected organisations in the Italian and Polish cases, mainly around similar policy areas, these contexts are characterised by overall fragmentation. In Sweden and in the UK, on the other hand, we find that there are a handful of key CSOs that link the majority of the resourceful organisations, thus occupying powerful network positions.
I explored the challenges facing work-affected states, especially their security system.
This second edition of a seminal work includes the original text, first published 30 years ago, alongside two major new chapters. Power, Freedom and Reason assesses the main debates about how to conceptualize and study power, including the influential contributions of Michel Foucault. Power Revisited reconsiders Steven Lukes' own views in light of these debates and of criticisms of his original argument. With a new introduction and bibliographical essay, this book will consolidate its reputation as a classic work and a major reference point within social and political theory.
Max Weber (1864-1920) was one of the most prolific and influential sociologists of the twentieth century. This classic collection draws together his key papers. This edition contains a new preface by Professor Bryan S. Turner. © 2009 H.H. Gerth and C. Wright Mills for selection Preface Bryan Turner.
In recent years a rich outpouring of case studies on community decision-making has been combined with a noticeable lack of generalizations based on them. One reason for this is a commonplace: we have no general theory, no broad-gauge model in terms of which widely different case studies can be systematically compared and contrasted.
Among the obstacles to the development of such a theory is a good deal of confusion about the nature of power and of the things that differentiate it from the equally important concepts of force, influence, and authority. These terms have different meanings and are of varying relevance; yet in nearly all studies of community decision-making published to date, power and influence are used almost interchangeably, and force and authority are neglected. The researchers thereby handicap themselves. For they utilize concepts which are at once too broadly and too narrowly drawn: too broadly, because important distinctions between power and influence are brushed over; and too narrowly, because other concepts are disregarded—concepts which, had they been brought to bear, might have altered the findings radically.
Many investigators have also mistakenly assumed that power and its correlatives are activated and can be observed only in decisionmaking situations. They have overlooked the equally, if not more important area of what might be called “nondecision-making”, i.e. , the practice of limiting the scope of actual decisionmaking to “safe” issues by manipulating the dominant community values, myths, and political institutions and procedures. To pass over this is to neglect one whole “face” of power.