# Authority vs Credibility By:: [[Ross Jackson]] 2022-10-26 Organizational communication is challenging. This shouldn’t be surprising. Interpersonal communication is tricky enough without incorporating additional complexities associated with organizational dynamics and power. When placed in an organizational context the notions of authority and credibility emerge as elements of consideration. Frequently these two elements are assumed to correlate. Those with authority are also considered credible. In highly dysfunctional organizations, those in authority hold zero credibility with those working. Like politicians, workers might quip that there is always a tell when management is lying – the manager’s mouth is moving. The crux of the tension between authority and credibility rests with the ambiguity of the term authority. Authority, within organizational contexts, is often used to denote one who has the power to command action. However, it can also mean an individual who is considered an expert. The first type has power and the second has credibility. One semantic trick is to use ambiguous terms to capture some of the beneficial sentiment from one context into another. In this case, one might attempt to capture the credibility associated with authority based on expertise in the context of authority based on organizational position. It is relatively easy to conflate things, so this attempt is likely successful, at least in the short run. With repeated exposure, workers become skeptical of managers with authority who lack credibility. Such a situation creates tension within the organization and impedes progress. Investiture of authority is immediate. One assumes that mantle upon promotion. This is a top-down activity. Earning credibility takes time and arises from the bottom up. The organization invests one with authority, the workforce acknowledges when an individual is credible. This is an important dynamic for analysts to consider as they often lack authority and can only be effective insofar as they have credibility. Analytics as a profession requires credibility for its results to be acknowledged. What analysts do in practice not only influences their credibility, but also that of the profession. One of the essential aspects of organizational communication for analysts is that what they do is credible even when it lacks authority. #### Related Items [[Authority]] [[Credibility]] [[Analytics]] [[Management]] [[Organizational Analytics]] [[Communication]] [[Semantics]]