Sociology

Max Weber was born in April 1864 and was a German political economist, politician, practiced law and also did a lot of work in sociology. Weber being an economist and a politician, he did a lot of work concerning civilization process and the system of governance in capitalist States such as Germany and other capitalist states (Weber, 1958).

Types of authorities according to Max Weber
He identified three types of authorities starting with the traditional forms of governance where village elders and chiefs could execute their authorities to people and referred to it as a traditional authority. He believed that in traditional form of governance or execution of powerauthority, community members were expected to pledge their allegiance and loyalty to the elders and to obey the leaders decisions even if it was not a solution to the problem in the society.

Max being a social sciencetist, he was concerned with the way people acquire exercise their powers and how it is passed to the next generation in the society. In his analysis, Max noted that in traditional authority, leadership was attainedacquired by the people who had great influence in the society in terms of wealth possession or ability to protect the society members from danger for instance, the warriors. Even though it was an irrational form of authority, Weber acknowledged that the leaders decisions and directions were treated with a lot of respect as compared to other forms of authorities (Weber, 1958).

Weber argued that traditional authority was one characterized with inheritance of leadership in a given community. Another type of authority that was identified by Weber was more concerned with the modern system of governance and was more rational as compared to the traditional mode of leadership. In legal rational authority according to Weber, authority is not centered on specific person but more systematic or bureaucratic for instance, pledging loyalty to one person in the society or getting directives from a specific organ in the society is not common in legal rational authority. Weber accepted that even though traditional authorities were obeyed by the people, legal rational authorities were more organized and power was not concentrated on one person neither was based on charismatic principles.

According to Riesebrodt, (1999) he argued that even though the traditional system was characterized by charismatic principles, legal rational authority was more pragmatic, organized and based on practical ideals that are not irrational or bias in judgments. Coser (1971),also concurred with the fact that traditional form of authorities were not only irrational but also based on supernatural powers and  the society believed that power was given by God and those in position of power were special and God chosen people.

On leadership stability, Collins (1986) argued that executing power and maintaining power are two different things, according to him power can only be exercised when the subject and the person in power can understand each other and execution of power is highly dependant on the ideals.
Collins, further categorized the two types of authorities both traditional authority and legal rational authority and argued that most people still believe in traditional way of executing authorities and do not appreciate modernity in legal rational authority hence making it difficult to execute authority in modern times. He therefore acknowledged that legal rational authority is rational enough but can be weakened by traditional ideals.

According to Crass (2003), both types of authorities are based on practical ideals and further argued that despite Weber categorized charismatic authority on its own, it was more similar to traditional authority in practice. Weber identified charismatic authority and argued that it was based upon individual belief system and faith. He acknowledged that charismatic leadership was one full of wisdom and that it was not only acquired through political contest but was based upon practical ideals that were believed to be good for all in the society.

However according to Riesebrodt (1999), charismatic style of leadership was one based on motivational and missionary principles and that most people believed that charismatic leaders were extra ordinary in their way of leadership, beliefs and life in general. People believed so dearly on their words, intentions and actions. The society also admired their leadership in a way that they could easily go by their decisions such as joining social movements, revolutionary ideas and occasionally follow their religious beliefs. Weber in his analysis liked charismatic leadership and he argued that, those kinds of leaders could bring a great change in the society and can lead the society in revolutionary movements or social movements. Since charismatic authority was based upon particular group of people in the society, most people could not get the chance to lead and therefore denied other people in the society to lead the rest as it was hereditary in nature.

Collins (1986), argued that the three type of authorities are still practiced by most leaders in the modern states, he also claimed that even though the three types of authorities varies from each other, most leaders in the modern system tend to mix the three types of authority since most leaders still appreciate the traditional forms of authorities thereby applying the principles knowingly or unknowingly.

Conclusion
In the three types of leadership classified by Max Weber, traditional authority can be singled out to be based on customs and traditional practices and that it was not only irrational but also natural authority that was exercised by few individuals in the society making it unique to the rest. Legal rational authority can be said to be more modern, organized and bureaucratic. It is also characterized by class and division in the society but more rational as compared to traditional mode. Lastly, charismatic leadership is more of individual prowess to lead people in a more organized and with strong belief system mostly characterized by spiritual inspiration, motivational ideasspeeches and individual talent in leadership.