2.

Bureaucratic Organizations
Review of how bureaucratic organization emerged and what gab to fill
this thought emerged.
1. Introduction
Max Weber (1864-1920) a German sociologist theorized about an ideal type of
organization structure which he called a bureaucracy. The theory has a great
influence on organization theory and management practice and is considered to be
the ideal type of bureaucracy. According to Weber, both the industrialization and
transportation revolutions allowed for the expanse of territories to be managed.
The demands placed on managing larger and larger amounts of territory as well as
people facilitated the need for bureaucracy, which is a system of fixed rules that
are impartially administered. The expanding market economy required
administration that is more efficient. At the same time, the emergence of
communication and transportation improvements made improved administration
possible. There are five major elements or factors that are important in the Weber’s
model of bureaucratic structures and which form a basis for the examination of
organizational performance. These factors are: hierarchical order, rigid rules and
procedures, impersonal relationships, bureaucratic transactional leadership, and
bureaucratic transformational leadership. Hierarchy and high structures are a
characteristic of bureaucratic structures as the most standard type of organization
structures. The chain of command goes straight up the chart with a decreasing
lateral spread, like a triangle.

1
For many decades, the term bureaucracy has been broadly applied to refer an
approach for management in corporations, institutions and governments. In fact, it
is an organizational structure aimed to achieve wide-ranging administrative tasks
by methodically managing the work of many people. The bureaucratic theory is
still applicable in numerous modern organizations that have multiple locations
(Daft et al. 2017 p88).

It was Max Weber who proposed this concept of organization and management.
Weber advocated that bureaucratic organizations establish broad and
comprehensive operating procedures for all tasks of a routine nature (Lutzker 1982
121). Weber's bureaucratic management theory is made up of two significant
components. The first element is that bureaucracy involves structuring an
organization into a hierarchy. Secondly, a bureaucratic organization is
administered by precisely defined principles, rules and regulations (Merz 2011
p56). These bureaucracy elements enable an organization to accomplish its goals.
Simply, bureaucratic organizations encompass a hierarchy of authority, specialized
personnel, consistent principles, rules and regulations, impersonal relationship and
career orientation (Johnston, 2015).

As Johnston (2015) points out, bureaucracy benefits an organization by generating

structures that help to keep employees productive and safe. It builds rigid
regulations and policies that must be adhered to promote the welfare of an
organization or the safety of all stakeholders. If challenges are noted, then it
becomes easier to solve them before the entire organization, business or institution
is affected by the issue. A bureaucratic context is characterized by job
specialization, which enables people to have well-defined rules for productivity
(Johnston 2015). The fact is that these rules allow the executives to oversee their
juniors with confidence as each action has been set. In other words, everything is

2
governed through a chain of directives in a way that facilitates equality and
teamwork within the structure.

2. Why bureaucratic organization emerged?

Bureaucracy, specific form of organization defined by complexity, division of

labor, permanence, professional management, hierarchical coordination and
control, strict chain of command, and legal authority. It is distinguished from
informal and collegial organizations. In its ideal form, bureaucracy is impersonal
and rational and based on rules rather than ties of kinship, friendship, or
patrimonial or charismatic authority. Bureaucratic organization can be found in
both public and private institutions.

Weber indicates that bureaucratic organizations have technical superiority over any
other form of Organization (Weber, 1948). He elaborates that developed
bureaucratic mechanisms compare with other organizations exactly just as the
machine with the non-mechanical modes of production. He adds that strictly
bureaucratic administration leads to optimal levels of precision, speed, un
ambiguity, strict subordination, reduction of costs whether friction, material and
personal. Bureaucratic structures have a certain degree of standardization. They are
better suited for more complex or larger scale organizations, usually adopting a tall
structure. According to Weber (1948), bureaucracy is characterized by well-
defined roles and responsibilities, a hierarchical structure, and respect for merit.
This view is supported by the finding by the study on optimal hierarchical
structures of organizations that can commit to their organizational structure, but
not to long-term wages (Shin and Strausz, 2013). They identified two effects by
which vertical hierarchies with more restricted communication channels improved
dynamic incentives and facilitated early information revelation. Because the
horizontal hierarchy allows more control, the optimal hierarchy depends on trade-
3
offs between information revelations versus control. They also indicate that
seniority rather than merit matters for promotions, and production
complementarities favors vertical hierarchies. There are rigid rules and procedures
in the Weber’s model whereby the division of labor is based on Matte functional
specialization, well-defined hierarchy of authority, system of rules and procedures
covering the rights; duties of positional incumbents, system of procedures for
dealing with work situations, the impersonality of interpersonal relations,
promotion and selection for employment based upon technical competence. A
well-tuned bureaucracy is actually one where individual decision are relegated to
functional steps to the extent that a bureaucracy that requires leadership is in some
sense imperfectly designed (Patty, 2014). Impersonal relationships exist in
bureaucratic structures such that the bureaucrats officially communicate from an
impersonal position, not for them personally. Bureaucrats adopt a self-protective
position towards official behavior which affects the performance of the
organizations especially in low job satisfaction and motivation and less of a sense
of social responsibility among the leaders.

According to Weber, the defining features of bureaucracy sharply distinguish it

from other types of organization based on nonlegal forms of authority. Weber
observed that the advantage of bureaucracy was that it was the most technically
proficient form of organization, possessing specialized expertise, certainty,
continuity, and unity. Bureaucracy’s emergence as a preferred form of organization
occurred with the rise of a money-based economy (which ultimately resulted in the
development of capitalism) and the attendant need to ensure impersonal, rational-
legal transactions.

The most notable contribution Weber provided to modern management was the
creation of the modern bureaucracy. Weber’s principles of the ideal bureaucracy

4
are shown. Although the ancient Chinese had the first bureaucracy, the notable
difference of Weber’s bureaucracy is that decisions were made on a formal basis,
rather than what a manager felt was correct. Weber stressed that knowledge, not
birth circumstances, should be the basis of hiring and promotion within a
bureaucracy. This attitude stood in sharp contrast to the policies and practices of
the time in both Europe and the United States, which stressed birth circumstances.
Weber also stressed that bureaucrats need to make decisions based on rules rather
than whims. The word bureaucracy has negative connotations in the mind of the
modern reader, but it was a vast improvement over what had occurred previously.
Prior to Weber, management did not have to provide justification for why they
made particular decisions, nor did they have to make decisions based on rules.
Hiring and promotion were based on nepotism, very different from the modern
meritocracy of today.

The bureaucratic form of organization was considered as a benchmark of success

and development in the organizational literature and it was perceived as a symbol
of the most efficient and highly successful organization in the field of
management. Bureaucracy is a formal system of organization and administration
designed to ensure efficiency and effectiveness. According to him, in this new type
of organization, leadership and authority were derived from a more rational
framework than was the case before. Previously, authority was derived from either
charisma or tradition. In the case of charismatic authority, followers obeyed gifted
leaders out of devotion, loyalty and respect. Traditional authority, on the other
hand existed due to historical reasons and people obeyed a person in power for the
simple reason that the person was in a position of traditional power, for example in
the case of monarchical or other hereditary leadership positions. Weber believed
that authority in the new, bureaucratic organizational form was more ‘rational’

5
because leaders were recognized and obeyed for subscribing to values of logic,
efficiency and reason. Such organizations functioned on the basis of ‘legitimately’
derived laws, rules and regulations. And laws, rules and regulations derived their
legitimacy from the consistent, disciplined, rationalized and methodical calculation
of optimum means to given.

Additionally, Weber also noted that bureaucracies entailed a separation of personal

from official property, and that bureaucrats were usually selected on the basis of
their qualifications (and not nepotism), were appointed (not elected), and were
compensated via a salary. Weber believed that for organizations to function
effectively and efficiently, there need to be an assurance that the workers would
respect the ‘right’ of managers to direct their activities as dictated by the
organization rules and procedures. Without this assurance, the system would be
ineffective.

Bureaucratic organizations evolved from traditional structures due to the following

changes:

 In traditional structures, the leader delegates duties and can change them at
any time. However, over time, this changed and there was a clear
specification of jurisdiction areas along with a distribution of activities as
official duties.
 In a bureaucratic organization, the subordinates follow the order of superiors
but can appeal if they feel the need. On the other hand, in traditional
structures, the authority was diffused.
 Rules are exhaustive, stable, and employees can learn them easily. Further,
the organization records them in permanent files.

6
  Personal property is separate from the office property. Also, the means of
production or administration belong to the office.
 The selection of officials is based on technical qualification and appointment
and not an election. Further, officials receive a salary as compensation for
their work.
 The official is taken in for a trial period and then offered a permanent
position with the organization. This protects him from arbitrary dismissal.

3. Summary

Thus, the most basic elements of pure bureaucratic organization are its emphasis
on procedural regularity, a hierarchical system of accountability and responsibility,
specialization of function, continuity, a legal-rational basis, and fundamental
conservatism. The emergence of capitalism and the emphasis on standard currency
transactions over and above barter systems created the need for bureaucratic forms
of organization in both the private and public sectors. However, the critical
elements of the bureaucratic form of organization also can conflict with one
another and are often at the base of criticisms that regard bureaucracies as
dysfunctional. In sum, what makes bureaucracy work also may work against it.

7
 3.Reference

Aldrich, H., & Ruef, M. (2006). Organizations Evolving. Thousand Oaks CA:
Sage Publications.

Max Weber, “Ideal Bureaucracy” in The Theory of Social and Economic

Organizations (ed. & trans. Talcott Parsons & Alexander H. Henderson). (New
York: Oxford University Press, 1922/1947)

Robert K. Merton, “Bureaucratic Structure and Personality.” Social Forces, 1940,

18, 500-508.

Weber M (1948). From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology. In H. Gerth, & C. Mills.
London: Routledge.

https://www.britannica.com/topic/bureaucracy

Bureaucratic Approach towards Managing Contemporary

https://www.grin.com/user/1794875

Robbins, S.P. and Coulter, M. 2009. Management, custom ed. New York: Pearson

Daft, R. L. 1986. Organizational theory and design, 2nd Edition. New York:
McGraw-Hill.