From Talk to Trust (or Distance): A Temporal Process Theory of Power-Claim Legitimacy among Peers

Abstract: Unsolicited suggestions are common among senior executives (peers) with similar positional power but different expertise domains. Although such suggestions can enhance decision quality, they may also be experienced as informal power-claims that challenge expertise boundaries and generate latent relational tension. Existing research offers limited insight into how peers interpret and manage these tensions over time, before disagreement becomes explicit. Drawing on qualitative interview data, we develop a temporal, interaction-based process model of how recipients evaluate the legitimacy of unsolicited suggestions, identifying three phases through which legitimacy judgments are provisionally formed, recalibrated, and ultimately consolidated or withdrawn. By theorizing legitimacy as a recipient-centered, interactional accomplishment, we advance research on interpersonal power, legitimacy, and conflict by illustrating how influence is negotiated, and conflict is pre-emptively regulated over time among similarly powerful peers.

Keywords: Interpersonal power legitimacy; expertise communication; peer conflict