Power and Leadership: A Complex Systems Science Approach Part I - Representation and Dynamics
share
Historical narratives are dominated by actions of powerful individuals as well as competitions for power. Characterizing the origins, types and competitive strength of different kinds of power may yield a scaffolding for understanding historical processes and mechanisms for winning or avoiding conflicts. Michael Mann distinguished four types of power: political, military, economic, and ideological. We show this framework is justified by four motivations of individuals to transfer decisions to leaders: Desire to be a member of a collective, avoiding harm due to threat, gaining benefit due to payment, acquiring a value system. Constructing models of societies based upon these types of power enables distinguishing social systems and describing their dynamics. Dynamics include (a) competition between power systems, (b) competition between powerful individuals, and (c) the dynamics of values within a powerful individual. A historical trend is the progressive separation of types of power to distinct groups of individuals. In ancient empires all forms of power were concentrated in a single individual, e.g. Caesar during the Pax Romana period. In an idealized modern democratic state, the four types of power are concentrated in distinct sets of individuals. The progressive separation suggests that in some contexts this confers a "fitness" advantage in an evolutionary process similar to the selection of biological organisms. However, individual countries may not separate power completely. The influence of wealth in politics and regulatory capture is a signature of economic leader dominance, e.g. the US. Important roles of political leaders in economics and corruption are a signature of the political leader dominance, e.g. China. Ideological leaders dominate in theocracies, e.g. Iran. Military leaders dominate in dictatorships or where military leaders select leadership, e.g. Egypt.
READ FULL TEXT
