Bureaucracy and Rationality - Essay Example

? Bureaucracy and Rationality Bureaucracy and Rationality Introduction: This aim of this chapter is to understand bureaucracy and rationality. Bureaucracy can be viewed as rational and irrational. It can be rational when an organization is subjected to a system of structure to regulate the rules and principles to activate the organization. It can be said as irrational if the bureaucracy is considered as a system of structural rules and principles which actually declines the psychological well being of people who work in the organization. In other words, rationality can be admitted in the organization where bureaucracy is practiced. Many large scale organizations follow a form of structure which is more systematic and legitimized policies. In fact, following a systematic structure in every organization is insisted by many of the management theorists, bureaucracy has gained significance among the development of theories and is frequently observed as a sub-section typical topic. The study of bureaucracy is studied as a new approach to organization and the business. Though the classical writers picked up their ideas and principles from practical experiences, their theories are also based on older basis of management concepts. Before we discuss about the rationality, we should know about Max Weber’s Bureaucracy and its key aspects. Max Weber is originally a German sociologist initiated a certain concern for bureaucratic structures in organization, when he was studying on power and authority as a main stream. This bureaucratic structure is the idea which to Weber almost came as a part of his study. He insisted that the key role played by the organization’s top decision makers brings about the change within the structure of management and also provided a steep rise to stable and standard administration procedures. The responsibilities and the tasks definitions played by the decision makers bring about these changes (Andreski, 2008). For Weber (1978), the development of the money economy was the basis of the development of bureaucracy (Gerth, 2003). As Lewis Coser (2003) comments, “In leafing through Weber’s pages and notes, one is impressed with the range of men with whom he engaged in intellectual exchanges and realizes the widespread net of relationships Weber established within the academy and across its various disciplinary boundaries”. This social network of intellectuals in diverse disciplines helped create a flexible mind with the ability and tendency to take assorted points of view (Allan, 2005). The term bureaucracy has its own criticisms that it is not observed necessarily in depreciative formal organizations. Weber analyzed that bureaucracies’ are not the same quality followed in all organizations. He viewed a clear progress of bureaucracies are markedly visible as the profits of increasing in identifying order and level-headedness into the society and its life. Max Weber’s bureaucracy was one of the most successful organization structures in the last century and also regarded the perfection of bureaucracy. The key characteristics of bureaucracy are outlined below: Formal Hierarchy Every higher level in an organization controls the lower level, thus forming a hierarchy which forms a basis of centralized scheduling and decision building (Slattery, 2003). System of Structure: The rules and policies made by the company permits decisions stated at high levels which in turn to be administered to the lower levels of the bureaucrats (Macionis, 2006). Work Specialization People are divided into several divisions on the basis of what kind of job they perform or the expertise they do. Work specialization allows people to do certain jobs in perfection (Macionis, 2006). Mission Focused Here, the purpose of the organization is of two means, focused above and focused below. If its main focus was to satisfy the suppliers, the panel or any group authorized it. If suppose, the focus lies towards serving the organization itself and some other internal processes like raising the profits high and approved my many of the markets’ shares (Schermerhorn. 2010). Impersonality Every employee and customer is uniformly treated and their individual differences influence at any point to any of the employee in the organization (Macionis, 2006). Recruitment by qualification and skills This view of bureaucracy is appointing professionals and employees who possess certain qualification and skills top perform the job. This is also another attribute, according to Parkinson. Line versus Staff Positioning As noted by C. Northcote Parkinson, the management and the professional staff in the organization tend to progress at expected rates, without the regard to the line organization. This was not explained by Weber as a key characteristic. Weber viewed bureaucracy as three types of authority. They are Charismatic- is to ascertain the power of people. Traditional- is the established power of organizations. Rational-legal-is the constitution of laws. In addition to it, Weber disputes that the society is amplified on the basis of rational-legal authority. Here, it is important to mention that bureaucracy was the ultimate form of forming an organization governed by rational-legal authority. The bureaucratic form is accepted by most of the people as the standard mode of systematizing any venture. People, in general, disagree with the advantages of the management; rather they keep complaining the bad side effects of practising bureaucracy. This happens because of the lack of awareness about the managing firm and the managers. Upon the other face of the bureaucracy today, many of these concepts seem more apparent. Even though it was a new invention, many organizations did not have these features. Though, Critics on bureaucracy were consistently made by people as bungling, sluggish and commonly awful today, indeed, in Weber’s period, they were noted as extraordinary machines which fulfill to accomplish their goals. Charles Lindblom's classic article "The Science of Muddling Through" (1959) outlined his view that the U.S. executive bureaucracy uses limited policy analysis, bounded rationality, and limited or no theory at all in formulating policy. Moreover, bureaucracies did become a great deal of flourishing, effortlessly outnumbering other firms which run by families and adhocracies. But then, bureaucracies are not suitable for the organizations which use technology as the major part of work production or else we could understand it is not clear for some organizations. They often do extremely well at production concerning to custom errands which can be more specific in inscription and do not alter hastily. Much of the criticism of bureaucracy is appropriate, and much of it appears to be inequitable remarks. The strength of the criticism makes tricky to visualize the recent huge level organizations’ functions and find out whether it can work without the least features of a bureaucratic structure. Bureaucracy has progressed out in the course of the growing mass and proficiency of organizations and the greatest claim for perfect management. The effort of the classical writers has specified emphasis to the cautious formulation and planning of organization structure. It further draws a clear and appropriate job profile for the employees on an individual basis. The individual worker knows his defined tasks and responsibilities towards the firm. Superior interest and the appropriate application of proficiency and scientific awareness have tinted the requirement for laid-down measures. Though the term bureaucracy was subjected for numerous criticisms, people wanted it to be administered in all the public sector organizations to function in an organized manner. Bureaucracy is Rational Bureaucracy and rationality cannot be distinguished apart. Weber, though his basic interest lies on historical and cultural trends of sociology, he concerned the wide extensive association bureaucracy, validation and lucid legal-legitimation. He argued further about one of the primary force toward modernity is rationalization. He reveals about mean ends- reckoning, where rationality is relating to the person and more specific. He added that bureaucracy is a process of systematizing human behavior from a time period and space gap. He specifies that rationalization as the contrary to enchantment. We know that enchantment is a world full of ambiguity and magic. There is another concept called secularization where certain divisions of the society are cleared by spiritual contexts. It is ideal to know about both enchantment and secularization at this point. Peter Berger (1967) defines secularization is a process where the various sectors of civilization and traditions are eliminated from religious centre and its representations. Therefore we understand that both the concepts of secularization and disenchantment provide a very linear pathway to the spiritual elements of the world. It is in fact, enchantment is the magic world filled within several stratums of forces, morale and gods, then we could say that a true way the secularization has existed from the beginning of the religion. Weber relates that rationality was constantly relative and never been absolute. He explained the two ways in which an action can become rational. Both ways of rationality are complimentary to each other. Instrumental rationality: One important obsession about rationality is the instrumental rationality. If an action ‘A’ is an proficient way of generating result B is termed as “Means-end” rationality. For example, if a person decides to attend university program to get a better job in future, thereby the degree itself is instrument for his future endeavour. He spends his time and money for his upcoming earnings. He is said to follow an instrumental rationality. On the other hand if he thinks irrational that getting a university degree is just a waste of time and money, thereby he decides to be quickly financially independent. Here we can understand the irrational bureaucracy of the person. If we could it is irrational it is understood that it could not be possible by the person, hence it is not accepted by the person. Even though, a person agrees rationality of bureaucracy to some extent, he could work with ease in all aspects in the organization. Therefore conflict arises between his values and attitudes towards the organization’s manager or other colleagues. Substantive rationality Another type of rationality is also more similar, but the outcome is not specific. Suppose an action ‘A’ is harmonious with value V is termed as “Value rationality”. A same above mentioned example will suit this type of rationality too. If the person thinks, that he is valuing himself as an educated person when he attends the course of study in the university. This is referred to as value rationality. The value is irrational if he thinks that being into a university will weaken his personality. Weber perceived that bureaucracy would have several merits over other forms of organization. Efficiency, Cheapness and Calculability increases with bureaucracy. Here efficiency refers to the precision of knowledge, speed of work, un-ambiguity, knowledge of different files, unity among the workers, strict co ordination between groups of employees, restriction of friction etc. Cheapness refers to the rate or cost per task. Calculability is the ability to calculate the cost or rate per task. The various movements of rationality is said to have diminished the affective part of human beings and kinship relations with humans. Due to the extent of the bureaucratic rationality, these effects were appeared to more distinct, that people felt distressed and unhealthy mental state. Because of these changes, we identify to our world by the means of financial reckoning, uncongenial dealings and professional relations. Weber tells us that as a result of rationalization the “most sublime values have retreated from public life” and that the spirit “which in former times swept through the great communities like a firebrand, welding them together” is gone (Franzosi, 2004). Despite considering rationality as a religious society and political issue, Weber visualizes other fields like artistic art, song and painting, had lost their creative character as well. Everything is subjected to rationalization, including the food which we eat, the clothes we wear, whether it is the McDonald experience or a fully loaded fatty food with excess of 2000 calories. Therefore, we can conclude that modernization process changes the world into a bleak and barren culture. According to Weber, there exist six preconditions for bureaucracy, and are not in any specific order. These preconditions increase as mentioned below. They are the population size and space, the increasing task complexity, the enormous use of markets and currency economy, the advancement of communication and transport technologies, the use of people’s democratic system, and the volume of rough and rationalized culture (Allan, 2010). These factors made out more purposeful and lucid communal relations and society, thereby paving way to make use of rational-legal power and bureaucracy which are almost exclusive. However, the increase in population and change in geographic space, the difficulty of practicing bureaucracy comes to pass. For example, China uses an extensive kinship system rather than bureaucracy. Weber argues with the intention of rational bureaucracies a good manager can be activated by executives, who have been chosen and skilled for precise jobs. Managers who have been trained for superior positions are regularly take turns through many divisions of an organization to expand early experience of various troubles as to overcome prospect problems to handle their future employees should precede. To conclude, Weber clearly mentioned about rational bureaucracies is required to be administered carefully by the developed rules and principles that can be educated and practiced by several transactions and experiences. It should be documented so that the rules can be future appraisal. These regulations and ideology can help us in predicting and coordinating the various actions of many managers at various levels in the association. Based on this argument, it is apparent to identify as many organizations to find out the best managers who would really follow the Weber’s rules and principles of bureaucracy. Hence, policy makers should be highly qualified and skilled and must report their decisions quickly and precisely to their superiors. The question of rationality of bureaucracy is considered to be open ended question. Rationality was a never ending link with bureaucracy. We think that several aspects of bureaucracy are irrational in certain situations. This cannot be ideal if we do not practice bureaucracy in large organizations. Though bureaucracy could be followed by many small scale industries, it is more apparent to be considering it as a perfect to practice. But we cannot expect people to work according to their work specialization. Also the hierarchy of decision making is not apt to be followed. Weber’s bureaucracy has been placed in the top position where rationality is followed by many of the managers around the world. Bureaucracy is Irrational: There are certain limitations on the rational choice of practicing bureaucracy. Since we all are humans, we are prone to errors and do not have the extreme knowledge of tackling every single problem happening in the organization setting by our own. Hence we can say rationality is said to be bound to an extent. Another important aspect to explain irrationality would be the cognitive dissonance. It is nothing but we tend to block out certain related information that does not agree to the problem with what we believe to be the exact solution. There exists overloaded policy agendas which could make policy makers and decision makers cannot handle too many things at a time. The pressures of circumstances limit the ability to choose the particular suitable decision towards an issue or problem. Decision makers have to make out their maximum time to one issue. It is not possible at most of the times. It is evident from the reports collected from various organizations that they tend to make satisfying decisions rather than optimizing ones. This makes bureaucracy much more irrational than moving into a rationalistic view. The Prospect theory suggests that managers tend to overact in situations which arise due to crisis and they underestimate the possible gains. This may run to a possible loss in the overall organization. There exists an unwilling attitude to cut losses which happens because of overacting in crisis situations. When it comes to bureaucracy, the primary policy makers and the secondary policy makers undergo a cold war of executing a plan or product, hence we can say two level of games play simultaneously. We call it as domestic politics which plays a role in international decision making. Another key aspect is about muddling through increment decision making by the policy makers. The distinct confusion between paying high or less for the staffs literally makes a kind of unhealthy atmosphere where there is no rationality can be expected. The next question would be which group may be benefit from the rational bureaucracy. The large scale organizations such as the central governments are complex bureaucracies. The president of U.S controls the various departments like the defense department, Central Intelligence agency, the joints Chiefs of staff and other large bureaucracies as state councils of assembly. Many people considered bureaucracy as a last rated system, which gives out no fruitful outcome for both the society and the organization. Weber even though he stated in several places about bureaucracy is the best method to be followed in the modern organizations, the possibilities of practicing it is very low, for complexity in the nature of the system. Argyris, Merton, Selznick, and Gouldner were some amongst the criticizers of bureaucracy. They commented that bureaucracy can overall destroy the mental health of a person; he could work in a contingent situation throughout his career. This draw back brought down as a failure model, though it is still maintained in few large government offices. Finally, we can conclude that bureaucracy is being followed by large scale organizations and thereby the bureaucrats are said be in distressed position. Hence there are much more disadvantages than advantages of bureaucracy. It is the point that bureaucracy is always not rational, so rationality is unexpected in recent days of modernization. The bureaucracy is not fully undermined, but can be practiced with at most care of rules and principles. The beneficiaries would be the higher levels of decision makers and the losers are the employees who are employed in the bureaucracy and could not follow the rules and principles which the hierarchy lays. Moreover, bureaucrats could not express their views regarding the management and its current policies. References Allan, K.D. (2005). Explorations in Classical Sociological Theory: Seeing the Social World. New York: Pine Forge Press. Allan, K. (2010). The Social Lens: An Invitation to Social and Sociological Theory. CA: Pine Forge Press. Andreski, S. (2008). Max Weber on Capitalism, Bureaucracy and Religion. UK: Taylor and Francis. Coser, L.A. (2003). Masters of Sociological Thought: Ideas in Historical and Social Context. IL: Waveland Press. Franzosi, R. (2004). From words to numbers: narrative, data, and social science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Gerth, H.H. (2003). From Max Weber: essays in sociology .London: Routledge. Lindblom, C. (1959).The Science of Muddling Through. Issue 45, Dated: Nov 7, 1983 Yale University. Macionis, J.J. (2006). Sociology. Pearson Education Inc. Schermerhorn, J.R. (2010). Management. NJ: John Wiley and Sons. Slattery, M. (2003). Key ideas in sociology. Cheltenham: Nelson Thornes. Read More