This essay will argue that, even though the concept of post-bureaucratic epoch is widely used nowadays due to the impact of contemporary organisational change, bureaucratic control still exist and cannot be eliminated. Furthermore, Weber’s Ideal type bureaucracy will be utilized as the trend of development of modern management technique (McSweeney 2006).
What is bureaucratic control?
The word ‘bureaucracy’ was originally used to describe government system, where most of the important decisions were made by state officials rather than elected representative, as per Oxford Dictionary. Nevertheless, due to the rise of scientific management, ‘bureaucracy’ was widely use to describe the management structure that involves the delegation of rational-legal authority to administration staff, which allows power and control over lower level staff without those authorities (Weber 1947).
According to Evans, the Weberian bureaucracy was said to be the fundamental, institutional sources of growth and development in a state [cited in Selgert 2014]. It describes how bureaucracy is recruited by implementing meritocratic standards such as entry exams, and by providing rewarding and predictable long-term careers. The importance of bureaucratic authority was stressed, in which individual obey orders because of the commander’s position. The model of bureaucratic control was derived, which involves the use of authority and hierarchy to enforce and impact on the action, behaviour and performance of staffs within an organisation (Weber 1947). Nevertheless, it is very hard to give a clear definition because of the diversity of theories and viewpoints revolve around the concept of bureaucracy, such as Weberian and Marxist social theories.
In what way have...
... middle of paper ...
...formance and efficiency, according to numbers of literature and studies in recent decades. Intensification of bureaucratic control is still widely spread and is supported by various examples and evidence which were found across different industries all over the world (McSweeney 2006). The emergence of service industry does impact on the change in modern management technique and leads to the rise of human capability and behaviour factors, as well as the significance of informal organisation and teamwork. Nevertheless, the ultimate objective of such approach is as an enhancement of control which in fact creates a more centralised management structure rather than decentralised. Therefore we can conclude that even though the approach of management have changed, the concept of bureaucratic control still remains and is something that cannot be fully abolished or replaced.
Often, when the discussion of American bureaucracy is broached in conversation, those holding these conversations often think of the many men and women who operate behind the scenes within the government. This same cross section of Americans is looked upon as the real power within the federal government and unlike the other branches of government, has little to no oversight. A search of EBSCO resulted in the following definition, an organization “structure with a rigid hierarchy of personnel, regulated by set rules and procedures” (Bureaucracy, 2007). Max Weber believed that a bureaucracy was technically the most efficient form of organization, one structured around official functions that are bound by rules, each function having its own specified competence (2007). This wide ranging group of Americans has operated within the gaps, behind the scenes, all under the three core branches of government: the legislative, executive, and judicial branches. The division of government into three branches and separate powers gives each branch both exclusive powers and some additional power...
The bureaucracy consists primarily of the executive branch of government, and its components. These include cabinet departments, independent agencies, regulatory commissions, and government corporations. Through the constitution, Congress is tasked with the responsibility of organizing and funding the bureaucracy. This gives Congress the inherent rights, among others, to enact statutes to establish or abolish executive agencies or departments, call for reorganization of
Once set up, bureaucracy is inherently conservative. The reason the bureaucracy was initiated may not continue to exist as a need in the future. The need or reason may change with a change in the times and the culture needs. A bureaucracy tends to make decisions that protect it and further it’s own existence, possibly apart from the wishes of the populace. It may not consistently reflect what might be optimal in terms of the needs and wants of the people.
According to www.wiki.answers.com, the bureaucracy is part of the executive branch and has powers derived from that. It has no single power, per se, however, since it has various departments, each department has its own mission with various powers allocated to each by policy, convention or law designated and defined by the department function. The overall indication of power is by its duties and responsibilities to develop the laws and institute the requirement of licenses, permits, fees and exams. These “powers” are controlled by Congress and in a small part by the President. The President’s control is with the ability to remove any appointed officials to the bureaucracy. Congress has the most control over the bureaucracy’s power; the ultimate control being the power of the purse. Congress authorizes the funds and then appropriates the funds for all departments. If Congress is not satisfied with the department’s performance,
Bureaucracy, a system of government in which most of the important decisions are made by state officials rather than by elected representatives. Bureaucracy is the way the government appoints large numbers of skilled people who must work together to decide how the daily government activates and decisions must be made. The word bureaucracy means “rule by desks or offices”. Many people see bureaucracy as pointless, but without a bureaucracy many people would not be able to begin to understand how to work together to actually accomplish goals. The president also plays a role in bureaucracy. The president is the head of the executive branch, and bureaucracy allows
Bureaucracy has been the main form of organisation for over a century and can be characterised by the following: functional specialisation, employees carrying out one function of activity as their primary role; hierarchy of authority, those in superior positions having authority based solely on the virtue of the position itself; a system of rules, the tasks of the organisation following a formal set of procedures and practices; and impersonality, individuals being treated on the basis of the rules rather than emotions and personality (Knights & Willmott, 2012). The mainstream perspective states that a bureaucratic organisation’s central aim is to maximise efficiency, objectivity and fairness and can be thought of as a ‘machine’ with the people making up the components (Knights & Willmott, 2012). This view attributes three problems to this rule-centred organisation: poor motivation, poor customer service and a resistance to innovation and change (Knights & Willmott, 2012). Employees in bureaucratic organisations tend not to be committed to their
Since the beginning of the establishment of human civilization, power has always served as a driving force. What started in earlier years as one person with many powers has now evolved into many people with one power. In modern day society we can find that there are levels of power that dictate status, importance, and ultimately authority. In this particular case, Max Weber speaks about the ethics of Protestantism that brought about the emergence of early capitalism, which in turn birthed what we now call a bureaucracy.
Bureaucracy is an organizational design based on the concept of standardization. “It is characterized by highly routine operating tasks achieved through specialization, very formalized rules and regulations, tasks that are grouped into functional departments, centralized authority, narrow spans of control, and decision making that follows the chain of command” (Judge & Robbins, 2007, p.
She conveys that business administration should avoid troublesome internalization by using an integrative technique. Unfortunately, Follett does not elaborate further on the context of what might this integration method appear to be. She changes the direction of her focus back onto the preparation of giving orders. Now, giving orders is a significant component to management but Follett should have provided additional information revolving the integration of management and the giving of orders. Fairholm suggests, “they misunderstand the evolving nature of authority derived from changing social structures, and because they have missed opportunities to tie in research procedures and focuses from intellectual interests such as psychology, sociology, history, and political science, not just scientific management, Weberian bureaucracy, and the like.” (Fairholm. 2004). Follett provides psychological perspectives, however maybe she misunderstands other perspectives, why further development is needed for her to examine. Follett later admits there is additional psychological, learning about the development of habits and the preventative measures of giving orders greatly surpasses than what she can explain in this article. It would be interesting if, she has examined and considered other theories and philosophies surrounding giving orders and
According to Sapru R.K. (2008) p370-371 the traditional ideal of public administration which inclined to be firm and bureaucratic was based on processes instead of outcomes and on setting procedures to follow instead of focusing on results. This paradigm can be regarded as an administration under formal control of the political control, constructed on a firmly ranked model of bureaucracy, run by permanent and neutral public servants, driven only by public concern. In emerging nations the administration was true bureaucracy meaning government by officers. In this perspective Smith (1996) p235-6 perceived that“the bureaucracy controls and manages the means of production through the government. It increases chances for bureaucratic careers by the creation of public figures,demanding public managers, marketing boards.
Although there are some differences among bureaucratic and scientific management theories, in actuality, they both share a deliberate and detailed approach towards improving an organization’s efficiency and effectiveness. Dissimilarities seen in these approaches may be due primarily to their points of reference. Where the scientific approach focuses primarily on maximizing the efficiency of work, the bureaucratic approach’s concentration is directed on the structuring of the personnel within the organization. Although there are weaknesses in both management theories time has shown each to be successful models. These two classical approaches to management complement each other and lend well to large organizations. Both theories have been universally adopted and adaptations of each are in practice today.
Traditional public administration is traced back to the works of scholars like Max Weber, Woodrow Wilson and Fredrick Taylor. This form of administration was mostly influenced by Max Weber with his bureaucratic model and theory. Max Weber was a well-known sociologist born in Germany in the year 1864. He came up with his bureaucratic model as a way to try to improve management in organizations. ‘Weber emphasized on top-down control in the form of monocratic hierarchy that is a system of control in which policy is set at the top and carried out through a series of offices, whereby every manager and employee are to report to one person in top management and held accountable by that manager’ (Pfiffner, 2004, p. 1).
There are three well-established theories of classical management: Taylor?s Theory of Scientific Management, Fayol?s Administrative Theory, Weber?s Theory of Bureaucracy. Although these schools, or theories, developed historical sequence, later ideas have not replaced earlier ones. Instead, each new school has tended to complement or coexist with previous ones.
Max Weber, Henri Fayol and Luther Halsey Gulick all addressed issues, concerning how an overall organization should be structured, bureaucratic administration, while Frederick Taylor’s theory of scientific management concentrated on techniques for increasing production (Tomkins, 2005). This essay will focus on the disadvantages and the advantages, including the effective and efficient components, of bureaucracy in public management.
The claim that bureaucracies are inefficient is the main driving factor for the New Public Management (NPM) come to exist in the 1980s.Though the public sector continues in its inflexibility, bureaucracy, expensiveness and inefficiency, the private sector was obliged to transform itself radically because of the sever competition confronted at the global level and explore new opportunities (Deal and Kennedy,