This paper examines how work partners with similar levels of formal rank-based high power, and diverse domain expertise perceive the legitimacy of unsolicited suggestions, and grant influence. Drawing on legitimacy theory and interpersonal power dynamics, we examine the effects of the claimant's power motive (self-focused, other-focused, ambiguous) and behavioral dominance (high vs. low) on legitimacy perceptions. Using a two-study, mixed-methods design, we found that other-focused claimants low in dominance were perceived as most legitimate, while self-focused and motive ambiguous claimants were perceived as less legitimate. However, when the recipient’s trait-based dominance-arrogance was factored in, these effects were reversed; self-focused and motive ambiguous claimants high in behavioral dominance were perceived as more legitimate. These findings contribute to the literature on power symmetry by clarifying how situational and dispositional factors jointly shape power legitimacy among expert peers. Implications for collaborative decision-making and leadership development are discussed.
