Journal of the Minnesota Academy of Science Journal of the Minnesota Academy of Science

Volume 38 Number 2 Article 17

1972

Influence--A Comparative Study in Three Rural Communities Influence--A Comparative Study in Three Rural Communities

David M. Slipy St. John's University

Dennis Kleinsasser St. John's University

Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.morris.umn.edu/jmas

Part of the Political Science Commons

Recommended Citation Recommended Citation Slipy, D. M., & Kleinsasser, D. (1972). Influence--A Comparative Study in Three Rural Communities. Journal of the Minnesota Academy of Science, Vol. 38 No.2, 116-119. Retrieved from https://digitalcommons.morris.umn.edu/jmas/vol38/iss2/17

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at University of Minnesota Morris Digital Well. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of the Minnesota Academy of Science by an authorized editor of University of Minnesota Morris Digital Well. For more information, please contact skulann@morris.umn.edu.

come to the conclusion that religion in the process of po­litical development has often been the necessary cause of certain patterns of change in political institutions, but not the sole and sufficient cause.

References APTER, D. E. 1965. The Politics of Modernization. Chi­

cago, University of Chicago Press. BELLAH, R. l 957. Civil Religion in America. Daedalus,

96:1-21. BINDER, L. 1961. Religion and Politics in Pakistan.

Berkeley, California, University of California Press. CASSIRER, E. 1955. The Myth of the State. Garden City,

New York, Doubleday & Company, Inc. DURKHEIM, E. 1915. The Elementary Forms of the Re­

ligious Life. London, George Allen & Unwin Ltd. FINKLE, J. L. & GABLE, R. W. Editors. 1966. Political

Development and Social Change. New York, John Wiley & Sons.

GEERTZ, C. Editor. 1963. Old Societies and New States: The Quest for Modernity in Asia and Africa. Glen­coe, Illinois, The Free Press.

GERTH, H. H. & MILLS, W. 1958. From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology. New York, Oxford University Press.

GREENSBERG, B. S. & PARTER, E. B. Editors. 1965. The Kennedy Assassination and American Public. Stan­ford, California, Stanford University Press.

LUCKMAN, T. 1967. The Invisible Religion. New York, The Macmillan Company.

MARCUSE, H. 1964. One Dimensional Man. Boston, Massachusetts, Beacon Press.

O'DEA, T. F. 1966. The Sociology of Religion. Engle­wood Cliffs, New Jersey, Prentice-Hall.

ODEGARD, P. H. Editor. 1960. Religion and Politics. New York, Oceana Publication Company.

0RGANSKI, A. F. K. 1965. The Stages of Political Devel­opment. New York, Alfred A. Knopf.

SMITH, D. 1965. Religion & Politics in Burma. Prince­ton, New Jersey, Princeton University Press.

SMITH, D. Editor. 1966. South Asian Politics and Re­ligion. Princeton, New Jersey, Princeton University Press.

STEDMAN, M. S. JR. 1964. Religion and Politics in America. New York, Harcourt, Brace & World.

VoN DER MEHDEN, F. R. 1963. Religion and National­ism in Southeast Asia. Madison, Wisconsin, Univer­sity of Wisconsin Press.

Y1NGER, J. M. 1957. Religion, Society and the Individ­ual. New York, Macmillan Company.

INFLUENCE-a comparativestudy ,n three rural communities

DAVID M. SLIPY,* DENNIS KLEINSASSER**

ABSTRACT - Community influentials have long been of interest to researcher and practioner alike. This paper deals with both the theoretical and methodological problems of identifying informal leaders. The influentials of the three communities are identified, and their social demographic, community participation and attitudional characteristics are scrutinized. Final,ly, the value of these comparisons, especially for the community development specialist, are examined.

At both the community level and the national level of political operations it has been hypothesized that the in­formal power sources play a key role in decision-making. During the summer of 1971, the Center for the Study of Local Government examined the characteristics of local influentials in three small Minnesota communities in re­lation to three areas of concern to both researchers and practitioners.

First, demographic characteristics are presented to de­scribe influentials. Second, the amount and types of com­munity participation that engage influentials is scrutinized. Finally, several significant attitudinal dimensions of in­fluentials are examined.

*DAVID SLIPY received his B.A. from Mankato State College and did his M.A. work at lowa State University in the Rural Sociology department. He is completing a study of community influentials for the M.A. thesis. Cur­rently he is the director for the Micro City project at St. John's University.

**L. DENNIS KLEINSASSER is Associate Director of the Center for the Study of Local Government at St. John's University, Collegeville, Minnesota. He received his M.A. degree from the State University of South Dakota and his Ph.D. in psychology from Pennsylvania State University.

116

Throughout the literature, demographic characteristics of influentials receive considerable attention, but partici­pation of influentials and attitudinal data have received less attention. For this study the authors developed a scale of community participation which included a multi­plicity of variables not previously configured as here and also began examining the attitudes of influentials as re­flected by their behavior.

The parameter of the study was the community in each of the three cases. But since community is an illusive concept, it has been defined here as a social system along lines of the definition by Talcott Parsons, who labeled the social system as a "mode of organization of action elements relative to the presistence or ordered processes of change of the interactive patterns of a plurality of in­dividual actors ." (1951).

Within the context of a social system there is always some hierarchical arrangement of individuals. Official positions or individuals without formal position possess greater control over local decision-making than do oth­ers. According to Max Weber this phenomenon of power is defined as "the probability that one actor within a so-

The Minnesota Academy of Science

cial reiationship will be in a position to carry out his own will despite resistance, regardless of the bases on which this probability rests. (Weber, 1947).

The power of which Weber speaks may manifest itself as defeat by a small group of a school bond issue or even as a one-man fight for urban renewal. Those who study society accept the fact that social power exists and that there are several types of power. However, theorists have long debated the exact types of social power and the forms or names for the various types of power.

Following the model of social power

A succinct model of social power within a social sys­tem, has been developed by rural sociologists at Iowa State University anais used as the theoretical framework for this paper. The two major concepts in the model are ( l) that " authority is the capability to control the be­havior of others as determined by the members of the social system," and (2) that "influence is that capability to control the behavior of others which is not formally designated in the authority component of the status-role (Bohlen, 1967).

The distinction made here is between power invested in the formal offices of a community or power invested in the informal relationships which exist. A mayor has "formal" power or "authority" simply because of the power invested in that office. A community member may have fill equal amount of informal power or "influence" because of who he is in a community, his history there, his control over financial resources, etc. Modern writers have for the most part accepted this dichotomization of formal and informal social power.

The first area to be examined concerns social status. The proposition that influentials generally are drawn from the upper strata of society seems well documented. Of several empirical studies reviewed, all report that com­munity influentials rank high on social status as measured by a combination of common indicators of status. Social status would seem to be a primary correlate of influence.

Among other correlates of influence are ethnic back­ground, religion and length of residence in the commu­nity. The exact source of influence usually depends upon area of the country, size of the community, and its homo­geneity. One important source of influence in rural com­munities is social participation. In a community where the population is quite homogeneous, religion or ethnic background is not generally a source of influence. In such a case, social status and length of residence in the community are excellent indices of influence. However, not all community actors who have high social status and a long residence in the community are witling or able to become influentials. Status and residence are potentials for influence, but the influence is given to those persons who are active in their community.

The second area this study will examine is the partici­pation characteristics of influentials. If influentials do rank high on a scale of participation, it lends support to the hypothesis that activism is a source of influence.

The attitudes of influentials have received even less attention than participation; yet if attitudes determine an

Journal of, Volume Thirty-eight, Nos. 2 and 3, 1973

actor's behavior, there must be a relationship between at­titude and level of participation.

This study has been concerned with attitudes which may be related to community activism, and two attitude dimensions pertaining to ones self are examined:

1. Attitudes of influentials about themselves as active citizens.

2. Attitudes of influentials about themselves as effective leaders.

Individuals also hold numerous attitudes regarding their community, and three of these are examined:

1. Attitudes of influentials about their town as a place to live.

2. Attitudes of influentials about local leaders as effective workers.

3. Perceptions of community solidarity.

Reputational approach There are several methods available for identifying

community influentials, including the positional ap­proach, issue analysis approach, social participation ap­proach, and reputation al approach. For this study, the authors selected a variant of the reputational approach involving the use of knowledgeables to identify influen­tials and a consensus method to determine levels of influ­ence. The result was the production of a list of 69 indi­viduals named as influentials in the three communities.

Scoring for status Social status was determined by a combination of

scores for education and income of respondents. Educa­tion was selected as an indicator of cultural status of an individual, and income was chosen over occupation be­cause it denotes family purchasing power. Chart l ex­plains the scoring mechanism used and offers a view of the social status of the 69 influentials interviewed.

The socio-economic (SES) characteristics are interest­ing in themselves, providing descriptive data on types of persons who have influence and decision-making respon­sibilities. However these particular characteristics have

100

90

~ so ~ 70

60

CHART 1. - Social Status (Education + Income)

~-~--~--~-~

Upper Upper .Middle Lower Class Middle Class Cla~s

Class

Outstate City~ N• \9

Ru ra I Town @ N=27

Center Town . ~ N- 23

CLASSES OF SOCIAL .STATUS

The social status score was devised by placing the in­fluential's responses for education and for income into six categories. A score of 3 or higher was defined upper class, 4-6 as upper middle, 7-9 middle, and 10 or larger, lower class.

117

more than a passing correlation with the power given to individuals. There are several possible relationships be­tween SES characteristics and community influence.

First, influence may be attributed to an individual sim­ply because he or she possess high socio-economic status.

Secondly, high status occupations may be related to influence. Bankers, doctors, and lawyers, to name just a few, are in positions of control over different aspects of life and are in limited supply in small communities.

A third correlate between socio-economic sta\us and influence may simply be opportunity for community ac­tivism. Persons who have completed college may be less reluctant to speak out on issues, volunteer their skills, and assume leadership over complicated projects. Also, professional occupations often afford individuals the time and flexible schedules to become involved.

Not all persons who have high socio-economic status are influentials or service-minded, but the literature does support the contention that most influentials also are members of the upper strata of community life.

Community participation A common problem in small towns across the country

is ,the lack of a professional staff within the governmental bureaucracy. The mayor and councilmen are part-time. There are seldom professional planners, and the planning commission is a voluntary group. The city attorney is us­ually retained on a part-time basis. There is an engineer, but usually with little or no staff. In many cases the city clerk performs the functions of a city manager in the ab­sence of a professional manager. The chamber of com­merce manager is usually a young, relatively inexperi­enced man with a small budget and no staff.

Given these circumstances, many community improve­ment functions must be carried on by voluntary organiz­ations such as service clubs and Golden Agers. The proj­ects these groups undertake are not limited to such simple things as Easter egg hunts but may include urban renewal, building a hockey rink, furnishing a park, or building a teen center.

If the right person becomes interested in some project, he or she may serve as a catalyst for the community moving ahead on achieving a needed goal. It has been noted in this study that one person can be instrumental in improving community life. For example, an urban re­newal project may be mainly the doing of one business­man. While he is motivated by trying to increase trade, his efforts may be rewarded by increased interest on the part of others and finally by community action.

It is suggested that influentials are usually active in community service. The next several charts can help de­termine whether this is so. Chart 3 compares the number of hours per month that respondents devoted to commu­nity service. Unfortunately, corresponding data for the entire population of the three towns was not available, but scores of this group are quite high. Approximately 30 per cent of the respondents claim more than 20 hours per month of community service, and more than 80 per cent claim above 5 hours per month.

More than 80 per cent of the respondents said they had served on a committee to solve a local problem. All

118

CHART 2. - Total Participation Score

Participation

Outstate City

Rural Town

Cent ·er Town

CHART 3. - Hours Devoted to Community Service

100~-~-~-~--~-~-~ 90

80.

70

60

Outstate City ~ '.l '-' 19

Rural T01~n Q:ia. ~7

Center Town ~ !t=23

20 16-20 11-15 6-10 1-5 r•onc t over

Uour5" Dori.atcd Per Honth

Hours Per Month

but two of the sixty-nine respondents had voted in the fast local elections. The average number of offices held by the influentials was four.

The total participation score ( Chart 2) assigned each influential was determined by a combination of five varia­bles.

The community participation scores begin to reveal a dimension of an influential not previously examined in careful detail. Certain attitudes are probably related to the high level of participation demonstrated by influen­tials.

Charts 4 and 5 compare the scores for the influentials of the three respective communities on two of the five attitude dimensions as perceived by themselves.

In total, the attitudes of the influentials for all five dimensions are positive.

Utility of the information gathered has direct relevance to the community development specialist and/ or indi­viduals involved in community service.

The term "community development specialist" as here, used refers to someone employed full-time in the field. Community service people, on the other hand, are those involved in either the formal or informal mechanisms de­signed to improve existing conditions but operating in a voluntary capacity.

The local influentials provide three critical types of assistance to either a professional developer or a service volunteer. First, as shown by the pa11icipation scores, they spend a great deal of time on community service and value that involvement. Since community projects often are years in duration, individuals are needed who can maintain their enthusiasm over time.

Indigenous leadership is critical to social action proj-

The Minnesota Academy of Science

CHART 4. - Leadership Self-perception

5

4 Outstate City ~ N•19

Rura 'l Town ,ffi] N•27 3 Center Town ~ N=23

2

ects. Someone familiar with the local situation must be responsible for controlling the project. Extra-community resources can and should be utilized, but to be congruent with community development theory, local citizens need to be in decision-making positions. Respondents in this study demonstrate their leadership capabilities both in at­titude and action.

An important aspect of any community project is le­gitimation. Within the context of a community, someone must sanction the actions of the specialist as well as the volunteer if the project is to be viable.

If influentials are convinced of the worth of a particu­lar project and support it actively, others in the commu­nity will follow their lead. The prestige, status, and influ­ence of local influentials can mean the success or defeat of a development effort.

Time, leadership, and legitimation are the three func­tions influentials lend to development projects. For these reasons it is critical for individuals concerned with com­munity development to be able to identify, understand, and solicit assistance from the informal power leaders.

The socio-economic characteristics of local influentials plus other SES characteristics will aid in the identifica­tion process. The exposure to the participation character­istics of influentials should convince Community Devel­opment Specialists of the service capabilities of this sub­group as an important resource. The attitude dimensions examined really offer only a cursory exploration into an area rich with information. Continual effort needs to be made in this area, even this limited study demonstrates that influentials see themselves in a very positive light when it comes to getting things done in a community.

The directive thus offered should not be construed as meaning that influentials should make all the decisions and carry on all the work. In fact, possibly the most critical need is to involve more people in development projects. Community development means community in­volvement. However, it must be recognized that some individuals have more power than others, do more work, and are better leaders, for whatever reasons. To imple­ment planned purposive change, improve the quality of life in non-metropolitian areas, or to make institutions responsive to local needs, these informal leaders must be included in the eff01i.

The President's Task Force on Rural Development suggests that "rural development as a community wide action program cannot start unless the local people want it, and it cannot succeed unless local leaders aggressively promote it. If a community lacks leadership, if it lacks local concern, if it isn't convinced that it should become

Journal of, Volume Thirty-eight, Nos. 2 and 3, 1973

CHART 5. - Community Activism Perception

5

4 Outstate City a N=l9

3 Rural Town fiill N=27 .•.•

Center Town ~ N=23

2

1

a better place to live - then perhaps it shouldn't. But sometimes rural development comes to just such a com­munity through the evangelical crusade of one person to get the community to raise its sights and fire its ambi­tion."

References BANFIELD, EDWARD C. and WILSON, JAMES Q.; Powyr

Structure and Civic Leadership in Strategies of Com­munity Organization, edited by Cox et. al.

BEAL, GEORGY M. and DARYL J. HOBBS. Social Action: the process in community and area development. Ames, Iowa, Iowa State University of Science and Technology. Cooperative Extension Service (Publica­tion SOC. - 16.) 1969.

BIERSTEDT, ROBERT. An Analysis of Social Power. American Sociological Review. 15: 730-738. 1950.

BOHLEN, JOE M., GEORGE M. BEAL, GERALD E. KLON­GLAN, and JoHN L. TAIT. A Comparative Analysis of Community Power Structures. Ames, Iowa, Iowa State University Press. 1967.

HUNTER, FLOYD. Community Power Structure. New York, New York, Van Rees Press. 1953.

JONES, EDWARD, E. and HAROLD GERARD. Foundations of Social Psychology. New York, New York. John Wi­ley and Sons, Inc. 1967.

KURODA, Y ASYMASA. Psychological Aspects of Commu­nity Power Structure: leaders and rank-and-file citi­zens in Reed Town, Japan.

BoNJEAN, CHARLES M., TERRY N. CLARK, and ROBERT L. LINEBERRY. Community Politics: a behavioral ap­proach. New York, New York, the Free Press. 1971.

LASSWELL, H. D. and A. KAPLAN. Power and Society: a framework for political inquiry. London, Routeledge and K. Paul. 1952.

ROBERT S. and HELEN MERRELL LYND. Middletown: a study in contemporary American culture. New York, New York, Harcourt, Brace. 1929.

MEZIROW, Jack D. Dynamics of Community Develop­ment. New York, New York, The Scarecrow Press Inc. 1963.

MILLS, C. WRIGHT. The Power Elite. New York, New York, Oxford University Press. 1959.

PARSONS, TALCOTT. The Social System. Glencoe, Hlinois. The Free Press. 1951.

WEBER, MAX. The Theory of Social and Economic Or­ganization (Translated by A. M. Henderson and Tal­cott Parsons). New York, New York, Oxford Univer­sity Press. 194 7.

WARREN, ROLAND. The Community in America. Chi­cago, Illinois. Rand McNally and Co. 1963.

119