Authority Structure and Collective Action: Leadership as Institutionalized Power in U.S. Union Organizing Outcomes in the Late Twentieth Century.

Beginning with Robert Michel's famous "iron law of oligarchy" dictum, leadership, particularly leadership in labor unions, was perhaps the first international organization dynamic to be systematically analyzed by social movement scholars Many working in the Michelsian tradition have criticized leaders of the labor movement for subverting working class struggles in order to advance their own self-interest. Recently, however, a new group of scholars have challenged the major assumptions of the iron law, exploring the dynamic elements of leadership. The paper seeks to build on these recent research by exploring two important topics: 1) how leadership authority is actually conceptualized, particularly within formalized SMO structures, and 2) the specific dynamics of leadership influence on SMO processes. To address the first point, I draw upon Max Weber's concept of rational-legal authority as a foundation for understanding decision-making dynamics within organizations. For the second, I examine two internal SMO processes, the allocation of resources for social change activities, and the selection of particular repertoires to achieve social change, given the entire range of strategies available. Using the organizing efforts of a sample of 70 local labor unions from 1990-2001, I find that a more nuanced understanding of authority provides us with a greater understanding of SMO dynamics than merely examining individuals who occupy positions of political leadership within SMOs. In particular, the political administration, staff, national affiliate, and membership of labor unions all shape, both positively and negatively, important organizing outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]