The iron law of what again? Conceptualizing oligarchy across organizational forms
The iron law of what again? Conceptualizing oligarchy across organizational forms
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/j.0735-2751.2005.00256.x
复制
发表时间：
2005-09-01
影响因子：
4.4
通讯作者：
Leach, DK
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Leach, DK
围绕米歇尔斯的“寡头铁律”（Iron Law of Oligarchy）的争论可以追溯到几乎一个世纪，但寡头政治的概念经常被忽视，所采用的方法尤其不足以分析非官僚结构的组织。需要一个概念模型来界定什么是寡头政治，什么不是寡头政治，并可以在官僚和非官僚环境中应用。研究中发现的定义不充分，原因有二。首先，将寡头政治仅仅视为组织结构的一个特征，忽视了一个强大的精英可能在正式结构之外运作的可能性。民主结构是一个必要的先决条件，但它并不能保证没有寡头政治。其次，将寡头政治等同于目标置换和官僚保守主义的研究，无法解释那些目标激进但却被统治精英所主导的组织。本文提出了一个模型，区分合法和非法形式的正式和非正式的权力，定义寡头政治的非法权力集中在一个根深蒂固的少数人手中。该模型旨在用于名义上民主的组织，以确定正式或非正式的领导层实际上是否获得了寡头控制。通过提供一个共同的框架来跟踪正式和非正式权力的分配和合法性的波动，希望这一模型将有助于对各种形式的民主结构组织可能能够抵制寡头化的条件进行更富有成效的研究。
The debate around Michels's "iron law of oligarchy" over the question of whether organizations inevitably become oligarchic reaches back almost a century, but the concept of oligarchy has frequently been left underspecfied, and the measures that have been employed are especially inadequate for analyzing nonbureaucratically structured organizations. A conceptual model is needed that delineates what does and does not constitute oligarchy and can be applied in both bureaucratic and nonbureaucratic settings. Definitions found in the research are inadequate for two reasons. First, treating oligarchy solely as a feature of organizational structure neglects the possibility that a powerful elite may operate outside of the formal structure. A democratic structure is a necessary precondition, but it does not guarantee the absence of oligarchy. Second, studies that equate oligarchy with goal displacement and bureaucratic conservatism cannot account for organizations with radical goals that are nonetheless dominated by a ruling elite. This article presents a model that distinguishes between legitimate and illegitimate forms of formal and informal power to define oligarchy as a concentration of illegitimate power in the hands of an entrenched minority. The model is intended for use in organizations that are nominally democratic to determine whether a formal or informal leadership has in fact acquired oligarchic control. By providing a common framework for tracking fluctuations in the distribution and legitimacy of both formal and informal power, it is hoped that this model will facilitate a more productive bout of research on the conditions under which various forms of democratically structured organizations may be able to resist oligarchization.