18004992
Is bureaucracy irrational? Reflect critically
In sociological theories, bureaucracy denotes either a means of management, or a particular kind of organization. Such organizations tend to have homogenous characteristics, including regularized procedure, the existence of a discretionary budget, a tendency to expand their resources continuously and progressively, and impersonal relationships with much competition for political position within the organization. 'Bureau', is a French word meaning desk; thus, 'Bureaucracy' in literal sense is to manage through a desk or office, so a form of organization heavily involved with written documents or in these days their electronic equivalent. Most economic theories of bureaucracy
…show more content…
This leads to the measurement of numerical values becoming the governing element of decision making to reach success. Alternatively, ‘substantive rationality’ involves considerations of social justice, ethical standards and a concern for social equity. Weber believed that formal and substantive rationality are totally different from each other, and that formal rationality does not rely on values and ethics to make decision to reach goals.
It was also Weber who began studies of bureaucracy, and whose works led to the popularization of this as a term. He developed theories of leadership, and how as society and organizational structure have changed over time, leadership techniques and organizational structures corporations adopt have adapted accordingly. Weber identifies three types of leader: the charismatic leader, who instills a sense of energy and eagerness among their team members. He is dedicated to his organization for the long run to produce adequate results. Secondly we have traditional authority, which is legitimated by the sanctity of tradition. The ability and right to rule is passed down, and is often often hereditary. But bureaucracies are typically led by the rational-legal leader, leading to a rise in this type of authority in recent times. This rational-legal will establish a clear structure within their organization, and follow procedures as they have been established, perfectly tying in with instrumental rationality. Bureaucratic leaders
The text describes a bureaucracy as a large, complex organization composed of appointed officials. The departments and agencies of the US government make up the federal bureaucracy. The federal bureaucracy has 15 federal cabinet departments with about 2 million full-time employees. (Wilson et al, 290)
There is a plethora of criticisms about the effectiveness of the Bureaucracy. Even during the 19th century, as Wilson writes, the Post Office “was an organization marred by inefficiency and corruption”. With an appointment standard such as the “spoils system”, where individuals or groups are granted high level positions based on political favors alone, corruption is almost a certainty. The political aspect of the Bureaucracy was prevalent in the military for over 100 years, as Wilson states “the size and deployment of the military establishment in this country was governed entirely by decisions made by political leaders on political grounds”. Political favors and factors plague our government, including the Bureaucracy. A by-product of these political favors and corruptions are stagnancy and mediocrity. An example of this, as
A bureaucracy is a way of administratively organizing large numbers of people who need to work
Bureaucracy structures are mass producing factories that work on a set routine schedule and require strict rules which are implemented by several managers. These types of companies are a stable work environment and employees do the same thing every day. Any company that requires a uniform standard to operate and produces mass quantities of a product will use this type of structure. An example of this type of company would be Snap On.
Bureaucracy was one of the most popular theories developed and is used in some modern organisations such as the NHS and the Police. Through the years bureaucracy has developed a bad reputation for de-humanizing jobs (Grey, 30) “In the ideal-type, people are no more than parts in a well-oiled machine –devoid of passion, prejudice and personality”, although some people prefer this structure (Handy, 22) “No one, it seems, approves of bureaucracy except, interestingly, lots of people in organisations who like to know where they stand.”
Max Weber was a German sociologist who first described the concept of bureaucracy, an ideal form of organizational structure. He defines bureaucratic administration as the exercise of control on the
Americans depend on government bureaucracies to accomplish most of what we expect from government, and we are oftentimes critical of a bureaucracy’s handling of its responsibilities. Bureaucracy is essential for carrying out the tasks of government. As government bureaucracies grew in the twentieth century, new management techniques sought to promote greater efficiency. The reorganization of the government to create the Department of Homeland Security and the Bush administration’s simultaneous push to contract out jobs to private employers raises the question as to whether the government or the private sector can best manage our national security. Ironically, the criticism of the bureaucracy may be a product
Weber states that organizations regulations are formed by few people and this people are the boss, administration employee who tends to have representation powers (Roth and Wittich, 1968). Weber states that the state tends to use bureaucracy on its people in order to establish authority. Bureaucracy is present in various areas in the environment and once bureaucracy is produced then it becomes difficult to
The word “bureaucracy” has a negative connotation to many people. The fact is that our current system of government would not be able to survive without bureaucracies. The bureaucracy has become the “fourth branch” of the government, it has quasi-legislative and judicial powers and in it’s own field its authority is rarely challenged. The presence of these large, inefficient structures is necessary if the American people want to continue receiving the benefits that they expect.
In his book, Bureaucracy: What Government Agencies do and why they do it, James Q. Wilson’s main objective is to better define the behavior of governmental bureaucracy, believing traditional organizational and economic theory does not adequately explain their actions. Wilson believes that government agencies are doomed to be perceived as inefficient entities by the public. He gives examples of commonly held perceptions of bureaucracies and reveals how these are mostly misconceptions. He points to the environment of bureaucracy, where rules and procedures, dictate goals, along with context, constraints, values, and norms.
Some have seriously misinterpreted Weber and have claimed that he liked bureaucracy, that he believed that bureaucracy was an "ideal" organization. Others have pronounced Weber "wrong" because bureaucracies do not live up to his list of "ideals". Others have even claimed that Weber "invented" bureaucratic organization. But Weber described bureaucracy as an “ideal type” in order to more accurately describes their growth in power and scope in the modern world. His studies of bureaucracy still form the core of organizational sociology.
However, despite Max Weber’s theory that bureaucracies are like iron “iron cages” that are a efficient form of administration. Prior to modern government reform patronage, spoils, and bribery were just part of the political environment for Public Administrators. In today’s, modern government Public Administrators are hired based on the merit and technical qualifications that secure the individual can carry out the duties of the office. However, Public Administrators are forced to work in a hierarchical organization
Based on this right, the bureaucracy designed by Weber has clear division of labor; thoroughly indicated hierarchical relationship and pointed out impersonal relationship (Crozier, 1964). In the course of history, there have been various more perfect organizational systems, therefore, bureaucratic theory was questioned and criticized by many scholar. However, there are still certain organizations that use bureaucracy theory to design the corporate structure despite many critical views.
The reading, “Bureaucracy”, explained how Weber disagreed with employees being loyal to their bosses than the organizations, which creates a family-like structure. He believed in a more formal structure which is known as bureaucracy. His theory of bureaucracy is defined by six major principles. The first principle is the division of work or management by rules, meaning there will be consistency in both organizational and management practices, making things easier and run more smoothly. The second principle is a formal hierarchical structure, meaning that those individuals with higher position will supervise or watch over individuals of lower position. The third principle is formal selection or employment based on technical qualifications, meaning employers should be chosen based on their experiences and capabilities rather than their personal choice. The fourth principle is the formal rules and regulations by the organizations and its members that should be recorded to be accounted for and showing consistency throughout. The fifth principle is impersonality, meaning managers should be unbiased, treating all employees and customers equally, being less influenced by their individual differences. The sixth principle is career orientation, where people are organized into units or groups based on the type of skills they have.
The word Bureau means office and Kracy means usage. So, bureaucracy refers to a form of social organization which is managed by strict rules and regulation and which has a goal of achieving technical superiority over any social organization. But