The perceived legitimacy of managerial influence: A twenty-five year comparison

The study examines perceptions of managers, nonmanagerial employees, students, and union officers regarding the legitimacy of managerial influence over various subordinate behaviors and beliefs. The results indicate that: (1) perceived legitimacy has decreased since a comparable study by Schein and Ott in 1962, (2) perceived legitimacy is generally related to proximity to the managerial role, (3) there is a high degree of consensus on the relative legitimacy of influencing various behaviors and beliefs, and (4) only issues of direct relevance to work and task performance are currently perceived as legitimate areas for managerial influence. Theoretical, research, and managerial implications are discussed.Blake Ashforth is Assistant Professor of Management at Concordia University in Montreal. His research interests include the adjustment of newcomers to work, organizational socialization, and the dysfunctions of organizational structures and processes. His work has appeared in the Academy of Management Review, Human Relations, and Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes.Raymond Lee is a doctoral candidate in Industrial/Organizational Psychology at Wayne State University in Detroit. His research interests include occupational stress and adjustment, work climate, and organizational socialization. His dissertation examines the antecedents and consequences of job burnout among supervisors in a large public welfare agency.The authors are indebted to Gary Johns and Ed Schein for their helpful comments on an earlier draft, and to Barrie Gibbs, Ed Schein, Hal Stack, and Susan Taylor for very kindly assisting in the collection of data at their respective campuses. The data were collected while the first author was at Wayne State University, Detroit. An earlier version of the paper was presented at the 1988 meeting of the Council on Employee Responsibilities and Rights in Virginia Beach, VA.