Weber’s Bureaucratic Principles: A Critical Overview Introduction In this paper, Max Weber’s contribution in modern bureaucracy has been critically discussed. Weber came up with the idea of principles of bureaucracy based on existing legal-rational authority in the society. His ideal type principles of bureaucracy are hierarchical structure, impersonal relation within the organization, capacity building of the employees, formal rules and regulations, management by written order and well division of labor. Critiques think that Weber’s bureaucratic model has significant limitation with its application in modern administration given that this model emphasizes on “dehumanization” of employees, process rather than the result, rules rather than
C) According to the Western model of social structure (Marx), the lower strata of different bureaucratic professions or domains might assimilate with proletarian workers, while the high bureaucracies – with the upper stratum of bourgeoisie. And in the last decades of the Western 19th century, the classical petty bourgeoisie even saw an outstripping of representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while mass-based interest groups and average citizens have little or no independent influence. Our results provide substantial support for theories of Economic Elite Domination and for theories of Biased Pluralism, but not for theories of Majoritarian Electoral Democracy or Majoritarian Pluralism”.
The term bureaucracy refers to a particular type and technique of administrative organization. In the 1930s Max Weber, a German sociologist and political economist; he wanted to find out why people in organizations obeyed those in authority above them. He wrote a validation that described the bureaucratic form as being the ultimate way of organizing government agencies. Weber’s study of business was centered on understanding the need for stability and consistency in achieving competence. Max Weber embellished the scientific management theory with his bureaucratic management theory largely focused on dividing organizations into hierarchies, establishing strong lines of authority and control.
Many theories exist that are centralized on the distribution of power within the government which are the Power Elite theory, the Pluralism theory, and the Bureaucracy. The Power Elite theory claims that single elite decides the life-and-death issues for the nation as a whole, leaving relatively minor matters for the middle level and almost nothing for the common person, while the Pluralism theory is a theory that a multitude of groups govern the United States. A bureaucracy, however, is a large corporation arranged of appointed officials whose authority is divided among several managers. Although all these theories have their reasoning on why they are more viable than the others, it is believed that the Pluralism Theory would be the most feasible
ASSIGNMENT QUESTION : Does Max Weber’s characterization of modern bureaucracy help us in comprehending the workings of present day rational-legal organizations? Explain taking examples. ANSWER : Bureaucracy is a body of non elective government officials and/or an administrative policy-making group. Primarily, I would like to throw some light on the characteristics of Max Weber’s bureaucracy which would enable us to understand the above mentioned question in a better way. So, the characteristics are as follows : • A formal hierarchical structure for central planning and decision making • Management by rules n executing the rules made from higher to lower level • Organization by functional specialty to improve efficiency • An "up-focused"
This principal structure of knowledge in modern society is ‘rationalism’ . It puts emphasis on the empirical world, the subordination of nature to human control, objectivist science, and instrumentalist efficiency. Modern rationalism produces a society overwhelmed with economic growth, technological control, bureaucratic organization, and disciplining desires. This mode of knowledge has authoritarian and expansionary logic that leads to a kind of cultural imperialism subordinating all other epistemologies. It does not focus on the problem of globalization exactly.
Governments and large private companies can be named as bureaucracies. Following can be identified as some of the elements of bureaucracy. It has a formal hierarchical structure. Formal structure is primarily concerned with the relationship between authority and
Max Weber, a German sociologist and political economist described a theory to govern organizations in a rational and efficient way, now known as bureaucracy. Weber believes bureaucracies not only strengthen efficiency and ensure equality in private sectors but also public which include governmental agencies, schools, and other corporations. According to Weber there are three distinctions of bureaucracy: traditional authority, charismatic authority, and rational authority. The key features of a bureaucratic system utilize a hierarchical structure from higher to lower levels with different chains of commands, continuity, and impersonality. A commonly known bureaucratic system in the Western world is the education system, which consists of armies of representatives-- students, instructors, administrators, and deans which are all ranked according to status and authority.
The word ‘bureaucracy’ has many meanings, to political scientists it is a system of government by ‘bureaux’ of officials. To Weber the word refers to the structure found in modern large organisations, whether they are government departments, business firms, armies or organised religion. It is a continuous organisation of official functions bound by rules. Weber thought that bureaucratic organisation was the most rational means of deploying power in any setting (Brown and Steel, 1979, p.160). In this essay, I am going to discuss how Max Weber’s theory of bureaucracy had a major impact on the development of public administration systems.
The history of Kemalism starts with the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. Then the movement of Young Turks established and had their power. When 1908 revolution has started, the Young Turks had taken power into their hands. The idea of them was to re-establish all Empire. All loses after the First Wolrd War showed that the Ottoman Empire will collapse.
Knott and Miller present a number of dysfunctions that are present within bureaucracies. A few types of dysfunction are goal displacement, trained incapacity and dual systems of authority (Knott & Miller, 1987, p. 110-1). According to Knott and Miller, goal displacement occurs when a rigidity cycle starts to produce greater and greater emphasis is put on the rules, rather than the actual purpose of the organization as a whole (Knott & Miller, 1987, p. 110). In consequence, goal displacement means that employees replace a concern for organizational rules and procedures in the place of organizational goals. In turn, rules and procedures loose their effectiveness and constructive purpose (Knott & Miller, 1987, p. 110) A rigidity cycle is a type
Formal rationality forces order on modern society through rigid, quantifiable terms by means of decisions that are based on rules and regulations that are universal. Formal rationality has contributed to the rise of bureaucracy, which is able to closely direct and manipulate behaviour. Rationalization of society The rationalization of society is a concept that was created by Max Weber. Rationalization refers to the process by which modern society has increasingly become concerned with: Efficiency: achieving the maximum results with a minimum amount of effort Predictability: a desire to predict what will happen in the future Calculability: a concern with numerical data, i.e., statistics and
The way in which a team of people is driven depends on many factors. Not in every situation, one and the same driving model can be applied to every human team. Managment of the lower class working goup will look differently than methods which will be successful in carrying out managerial groups. The core of leadership is the pursuit of tasks and the achievement of the goal. The essence of the function will be a complex set of problems, including the creation and maintenance of an executive team, the perception of individual work issues, the ability to take care of their affairs, the leadership style, the boss's culture, the level and culture of the team.
Without the necessary checks-and-balances provided by a liberal democracy and strong regulatory institutions, the Western model of bureaucracy in post-colonial Asia only led to the development of an overly-powerful and politicised bureaucracy. In non-colonial Asia, democratic culture and institutions were similarly weak since most of these states were militaristic, monarchical regimes before the war –Japan and Thailand, contributing to the same outcome. Using Indonesia as an example of colonial Asia, the Indonesian military bureaucracy rose to power together with Sukarno and his party of civilian bureaucrats (PNI) in their nationalist struggle for independence. Hence, from the outset, the local bureaucracy played a highly political role,
Bureaucracy is an organizational form with certain dominant characteristics e.g. : hierarchy of authority and a system of rules. It is distinguished from informal and collegial organizations. In its ideal form, bureaucracy is impersonal and rational and based on the rules and regulations of the organization. In his analysis of Organizations, Weber identified three basic types of legitimate authority; Traditional, Charismatic and Rational Legal Authority.
Throwing the word government out in a conversation can often cause anxiety among fellow peers, as with the word politician. Often a person’s response may be, “let’s not get into that right now.” Consequently, some would call that a knee jerk reaction. Fortunately, there’s no time like the present to dive right in and begin to unpack this thinking concerning the overall impact of government in our society, in addition to the level of importance bureaucracy has within it. Today’s political climate seems to be an all-out war. Resulting the casting of stones, one way or another and the media has more to share than their mouths can blurt out.
Introduction An all-encompassing and established bureaucracy is a key feature of the modern state. Due to the substantial expansion of the scope of the state over the years as well as the complexity of involved in the wide-ranging administrative tasks, the bureaucracy has become indispensable to the efficient running of the state due to its primacy as a source of knowledge, technical expertise and information to the politically elected leaders. As a natural extension, the role of the bureaucracy entails providing comprehensive advice and suggestions in the form of policy options to key decision makers. In addition, it is also integral to the implementation of the final policy decided on by the top leaders. These two responsibilities present convenient channels for the bureaucracy to deviate from the foreign policy direction of their political masters – especially in liberal democracies, where the tension between career bureaucrats who are experienced professionals with a relatively permanent position in the state structure,
With little argument, Henri Fayol’s theory of administrative management fit together nicely into the bureaucratic superstructure described by Max Weber, a German theorist and sociologist. Max Weber is a prominent contributor to the classical approach to management who proposed a Bureaucratic management model theorizing that organizations could be “managed on an impersonal and rational level (Abhijith, R., 2011).” He embellished Frederick Taylor’s scientific management theory with his bureaucratic model by putting focus on dividing organizations into a formal system based on hierarchical levels and strong lines of authority which he believed was essential to maintaining organizational efficiency. In his quest to explain how efficiency could be achieved, like that of Taylor and Fayol; he suggested three types of authority systems under which he believed formed the proper environment for the success of his bureaucratic model. He spoke of: a. Charismatic Authority – which he believed was derived from the personal qualifications of the
Conflict is part of day to day life in every organisation due to different beliefs, values, religion, age and culture of employees. This is a challenge to managers and directors to solve conflicts, if they arise, by being innovative in creating solutions but not all conflict are bad. There are some conflicts that can help the life of the organisation as it learns and grows as it serves to modify strategies and techniques. Unresolved conflicts lead to unproductive human resources and can lead to absenteeism and decreases the levels of cooperation, which is very bad for the life of the organisation. Conflict happens when two or more contradictory perspectives haven’t been agreed on, but it’s not necessarily a bad thing.
There exist mixed opinions and perceptions about bureaucracy, and is application in the study of the modern-day organizations. While some feel that bureaucracy is suitable for a majority of 21st century organizations, others have the perception that it is unfit for these organizations. Those who maintain that bureaucracy is appropriate for modern organizations contend that it reinforces employee commitment, motivation, and trust, while easing tension emanating from conflict of interests as employees strive to accomplish their routine tasks. On the other hand, those opposing such proponents argue that bureaucracy is characterized by employee alienation, low commitment levels, and too much inflexibility, making it unsuitable for the rapidly changing