The Difference Between Power Wielders and Leaders By George MacGregor Burns

"The two essentials of power are motive and resource."

Weber on power, power "is he probability that one actor witha social relationship will be in a position to carry out his own will despite reistance, regardless of the basis on which this probability rests."

P equals the power holder and R equals the power recipient. Probability determines the actions of the power recipient. So, Burns asks, what controls the degree of probability?

He explores the role of purpose and determines that a psychological approach is easier to understand. He assumes that power is a relationship that involves intention, and purpose, of both the P and the R. Since he is difficult to paraphrase, I will simply quote:

I view the power process as one in which power holders, possessing certain motives and goals, have the capacity to secure changes in the behavior of respondent, human or animal, and in the environment, by utilizing the resources in their power base, including factors of skill, relative to the targets of their power-wielding and necessary to secure such changes.

Some people enjoy "effectance" (titled so by robert white) which is simply enjoying ones own skills. other people, like Hobbes, Nietzsche and Machiavelli exploit external resources consciously. P's of this type will always choose satisfying their own needs over R's. While some P's seem to have unbridled, or naked, power, they are subject to constraining circumstances at all times.


Leadership and Followership

"Leadership over human beings is exercised when persons with certain motives and purposes mobilize, in competition or conflict with others, institutional, political, psychological, and other resources so as to arouse, engage, and satisfy the motives of followers. ...Leadership is exercised ina condition of conflict or competition in which leaders contend in appealing to the motive bases of potential followers unlike naked power in which P's do not engage.

Leadership, unlike general power, specifically acknowledges a common goal. Burns argues that this is where real change occurs.

Linkage theory: the mapping of communication and other interrelations among power holders in different spheres (e.g. military, economic)

Burns measures power and leadership by the degree of production of intended effects.


Thus, when Burns summarizes that political elitism grossly confuses power and leadership his former statement becomes clear and well supported.