The Hierarchy Problem By J.

Stumak
BUREAUCRACY

Bureaucracy is a concept in sociology and political science that refers to the way that the administrative execution and enforcement of legal rules is socially organized (New World Encyclopedia para. 1). Interestingly, its root word adds to the controversy that surrounds it. Bureaucracy is derived from the word bureau which means a writing desk in a place of work and kratia that translates to power or rule (New World Encyclopedia para. 2). Max Weber, writing in late 1800s and early 1900s, was anxious as to what he saw as a dreadful bureaucratic future. He had foreseen a future where nonentities flourished: Specialists without spirit, sensualists without heart; this nullity imagines that it has attained a level of civilization never before achieved (Weber 189). The existence of overbearing and self-important people in an organization results to red tape, eventually making the whole operation dysfunctional. Instead of motivating people to excel, it creates thoughtless followers instead of grooming potential leaders. The top-down flow of decisions actually retards innovation and will, the workforce increasingly becomes disgruntled, consequentially leading to a high turnover rate. A case in point is AT&T, a company that was broken down in 1984 by the federal government because of monopolistic features. It was squeezed out of the telecommunications industry and was totally down until one of its former subsidiary companies, Southwestern Bell, acquired it and transformed it to the present AT&T (Sorkin para. 5). The company has grown again and is actually poised to acquire T-Mobile for $39 billion; a move which will make it the biggest cellular carrier in the United States (Sorkin para. 14). However, complaints have been pouring in regarding red tape in its most important functionality customer service. To illustrate, a client was about to relocate in 2008; five weeks before moving, the client called the billing section of AT&T

and the account was set up for disconnection and reconnection at the same day that the client would be moving in to a new location (Dunlap para. 1). However, two days after the call, the internet just went dead. The client called AT&T Technical Support, after being put on hold for 45 minutes, the support person stated that he had no idea as to what happened and that it was probably the fault of the Billing Department. The client then called the Billing Department; after being put on hold for 30 minutes, was told that the account was disabled and that such was in the jurisdiction of the New Billing Department. Continuing with the ordeal of this AT&T red tape, the client then called the New Billing Department; after 40 minutes on hold, a lady stated that someone cut the account earlier than was supposed to be and would be putting a rush order to restore the service. The lady also said that she would call the client back later in the day. After 24 hours with no word from AT&T, the client calls New Billing Department again, after 20 minutes on hold, was told that the Provisioning Department could help in expediting the reconnection. After 15 minutes on hold, the Provisioning Department informed the client that there was no order for a new DSL connection in their computers for the said client and would have to call New Billing Department. After 10 minutes later, both Provisioning and Billing managers were talking in the same line and agreed that the new order was not valid and a new one had to be placed for the client. The new order would take 24 hours and the client had no recourse but to wait again. After 24 hours expired, the client called the Billing Department; after 10 minutes on hold, was told that the service set up could not be completed as it was a new order and new orders cannot be placed in an account that is about to be closed; even if it was only for a relocation, this type of arrangement was considered a closed account and had to go through the same process. The client was told that the issue was being referred to the Resolution Department, after being placed on hold for 15 minutes, a lady from the

Resolution Department was trying to bypass all the intricacies, but was unable to. The client finally got back the internet connection after two weeks. This client stayed with AT&T despite the dreadful experience and contends that all internet providers have their own horror stories anyway (Dunlap para. 3). Bureaucracy clearly takes a toll on customers who need the services of these institutions and in return, the customers do develop dissatisfaction with such companies. Clear Hierarchy of Authority In Max Webers elements of bureaucracy, the creation of authority levels is essential in managing the control system in an organization. The authority structure has formal rules and establishes a hierarchy; this is supported by a system of assigning authority based on knowledge, skills, seniority, and the sort (BusinessMate.org para. 5). AT&T has developed a very large bureaucracy. A former intern who joined in 2011 claims that it was difficult to get things done. This intern further states that: There seem to be a lot of people stuck in middle management (Glassdoor n.pag.). Senior management should eliminate as least one of these management levels as there are too many processes to go through, for both employee and client. Accountability in management had been greatly diminished and efficiency had been greatly affected; especially customer service. This poor customer service has affected the employees themselves, one of the reasons why many people are leaving AT&T.

Rigid Division of Labor A company is supposed to cater to clients; with bureaucratic flowcharts, the division of labor fails to work for operational efficiency; this makes contracting business with an organization laborious on the clients side. As was shown earlier, there is a very rigid division of labor that one department cannot bypass as the control of a certain concern falls in the jurisdiction of another

department. The company has also been insistent in retaining the same employees that are manning these departments. AT&T has been trying to make a good face by projecting that it is pro employee and that it has job security, keeping old employees until they retire. Such wrong notion protects those that are no longer functioning well with new systems and are causing further delays in operational flowcharts. The current Director for Product Management in San Francisco, California claims that because of AT&Ts size and bureaucracy, people are usually retained in the system. This situation has led to cronyism, bureaucracy, extreme scarcity of resources, antiquated management philosophy for a technology business, sub-market salaries and overall, mediocre compensation and benefits (Creativity and Speed n.pag.). Thus, the rigid division of labor is further aggravated by old thinking. Written and Inflexible Rules, Regulations, and Procedures One thing about getting accepted for a job is that the new employee will be given an orientation as to the duties and responsibilities of their post. The job description is replete with inflexible rules, regulations, and procedures that are clearly placed in writing and which the new employee has to keep in mind always. An indiscretion against policy will mean getting fired. A Senior Technical Architect in Middletown, New Jersey implies that playing by the rules translate to safety and not getting laid off. However, the architect claims that AT&T endures only because it is a monopoly or its inflexibility will not allow it to survive in a truly competitive environment (AT&T Changing n.pag.). This same executive further states that the company has not been attractive to young and talented workers who would rather go to Google; most of the people in his department are older workers with more than twenty years on the job and are waiting for retirement. Impersonal Relationships

Due to the size and bureaucracy, the atmosphere of working in AT&T is increasingly that of impersonal relationships. People in the Billing Department are not closely acquainted with the people in the Resolution Department. They are even unaware of what the other is doing or as to what they should be functioning for. Clients who contract with the company are baffled as to why one department seems to be worlds apart from another department. This clearly shows that AT&T does not take the initiative to at least get their people to know each other and to know the vital importance of each. They have become automatons that are only good for a specified function and they themselves will actually get lost in the maze of operational flowcharts created within these departments and across these departments.
DECISIONS THAT BENEFIT CERTAIN DEPARTMENTS RATHER THAN THE ENTIRE COMPANY

A Department Head may think only of his Division when making Decisions Department heads, just like any other employee, have their own job descriptions, their task is to make the department functional and profitable. If they aspire to look good, then their department has to outshine any other department in the organization. The manager can only work under the mandate of his office and at that, they have to ensure that everything runs smoothly. They have to make sure that they have all that they need in running the operations smoothly and that morale within the department is high. Because department heads are responsible for their own division and are accountable if they fail or succeed, they do tend to make decisions that first benefit their own department. Sometimes they do this to outperform other department heads; sometimes it is a matter of survival especially when a division is not doing well. Decisions may always be self serving in institutional settings and it is the task of senior management to make sure that all departments are attuned to the companys total objective. Personal Differences among Department Heads and their Members

The thing about AT&T is that as it continues to grow, its employees lose touch with each other; people from different departments no longer interact regularly. The important thing about casual interactions is that it provides for people to iron out simple differences so that they do not escalate to unmanageable levels. As the company continues to expand, certain departments act like they are a separate company. The Billing Department, which handles finances, can be so separated from the workings of the Provisioning Department, which handles service connection. This situation results to alienation and the development of friction among personalities. There will always be aberrations in the conduct of affairs between departments and this can lead to managers harboring grudges against other managers. Such frictions emanating from the top will trickle down to the rank and file, who have established loyalties with their bosses over time. AT&Ts Software Development Manager stationed in Bothell, Washington states that: Process and procedure runs rampant with lots of conflicting direction (AT&T is lost n.pag.). As animosities develop among department heads, their decision making will surely be affected and they will tend to think of the welfare of their own people; together, they work for their own objectives only. Reward Systems may Breed Unrestrained Competition Is has been customary for companies to put up rewards for the best employee, best department, and other meritorious acts. These initiates competition among employees and the contest sometimes become cutthroat especially with long term implications like promotions. Individuals and departments try to impede the workings of others for their own aggrandizement. Department heads will try to do anything under their power so that they and their departments are top of the game. At this tough competitive environment, the total institutional objective may be undermined while certain divisions are doing well.

In conclusion, bureaucracy is a system that was invented to correct old inefficient systems. It sought to define a sound division of labor complemented by competent management that adheres to a strategic plan. However, even Max Weber knew that the system is prone to be corrupted and be abused to the detriment of clients and society as a whole. This set up is further aggravated by biased decision making that serves to upgrade the status of certain individuals or departments. All these complexity generate red tape and compromise an institutions profitability and even its mere wellbeing. Management and the rank and file should be properly enlightened on operational flowcharts so that the trap of bureaucracy and biased decision making is avoided.

Works Cited BusinessMate.org. Max Webers Theory of Bureaucracy. 4 November 2009. Web. 5 July 2012. <http://www.businessmate.org/Article.php?ArtikelId=30> Dunlap, Jonathan. 02 Dec at&t: Why Bureaucracy and Technology Dont Mix. 2 December

2008. Web. 11 July 2012. <http://www.jadbox.com/2008/12/att-why-bureaucracy-andtechnology-dont-mix/> Glassdoor. AT&T: Changing Its Name to Bureaucracy. 29 December 2008. Web. 12 July 2012. <http://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/Employee-Review-AT-and-TRVW140342.htm> Glassdoor. Bureaucracy and Micro-management Run Amok. 22 June 2009. Web. 11 July 2012. <http://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/Employee-Review-AT-and-T-WirelessRVW159901.htm> Glassdoor. Creativity and Speed stymied by AT&T bureaucracy. 13 April 2012. Web. 11 July 2012. <http://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/Employee-Review-Yellowpages-comRVW1444241.htm> Glassdoor. Great opportunities in a large bureaucratic company. 8 September 2011. Web. 12 July 2012. <http://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/Employee-Review-AT-and-TRVW1098199.htm> New World Encyclopedia. Bureaucracy. 3 April 2008. Web. 5 July 2012. <http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Bureaucracy> Sorkin, Andrew Ross. Back to the Future for AT&T. 21 March 2011. Web. 10 July 2012. <http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2011/03/21/back-to-the-future-for-att/>