Hierarchy, history, and semi-contractual arrangements substitute for measuring power

Evidence

Firstly, hierarchies which postulate an asymmetrical distribution of power serve as substitutes. It is assumed that a superior has more power than an inferior (although in bureaucratic organizations the opposite may be normal). Another substitute is the history of the system; cases of past successes in obtaining desired outcomes in conflict situations are recalled, normalized, and generalized as expectations. This function, as a basis for comparison, goes together with the symbolic explosiveness of concerns about status and single events, which are used in a way that brings present power constellations too much to the foreground. Thirdly, there are important possibilities for substitution in semi-contractual arrangements, whereby a too-powerful partner comes to terms with those who might withdraw or be disloyal. In all these cases the direct communicative recourse to power is replaced by reference to symbols which commit both sides normatively, and at the same time take into account the presumed power differential. — Niklas Luhmann, Trust and Power, 599

Categorization

Category: Definitional Content

• XREF: Hierarchy as a power substitute maps directly onto how Stevens’s deference to the butler’s hierarchy and to Darlington’s title replaces any actual measured power — and onto Giddens’s faceless commitments where institutional positioning stands in for personal trust.

Related

• Society substitutes symbolic hierarchies for exact power measurement (similarity 0.92)
• Hierarchy replaces power measurement with transitive ordering of roles. (similarity 0.81)
• Organizations are not merely the extended arm of a power-holder (similarity 0.80)
• Organizations can differentiate power bases but not power’s subject matter, blocking negotiated balance. (similarity 0.79)
• Theorizing power requires borrowing general concepts from other domains rather than defining it directly (similarity 0.78)

Broader Connections

• Measuring power would destroy the institutional substitutes that sustain it #expands (0.75) — Niklas Luhmann, Trust and Power, 600
• Power cannot self-realize but depends on societal-structural conditions for legitimacy #expands (0.70) — Niklas Luhmann, Trust and Power, 743
• Power rests on arrangements over what is possible #corroborates (0.70) — Niklas Luhmann, Trust and Power, 791
• Power relations that pre-select compliant partners reduce information-processing demands #corroborates (0.65) — Niklas Luhmann, Trust and Power, 685