Bureaucracy in Housing and Support Organisations - Coursework Example

Could housing and support organisations be made more bureaucratic, and if so, would they be more efficient Introduction One of the most important challenges of organizations worldwide is to keep their efficiency at high levels. The advances of technology have not been able to support the organizational activities – at least not at the level required. The use of theoretical schemes for the restructuring of organizational tasks could help to the improvement of employee performance and the increase of equality within organizations. Under these terms, the increase of organizational performance could be easily achieved. Bureaucracy is a theoretical concept of such type. Bureaucracy can be developed either in the context of the state or in the context of an organization; in the first case, bureaucracy is established through a bureaucratic agency while in the second case the framework through which bureaucracy is promoted is known as bureaucratic enterprise (Calhun et al. 2007, p.264). The value of bureaucracy within organizations is highlighted in the work of well-known theorists, such as Weber. Of course, there have been oppositions towards the potential use of bureaucracy in the organizational environment. The risk of de-humanization of the organization involved (Du Gay, 2000, p.40) and the promotion of ‘technical ethics instead of moral ethics’ (Du Gay, 2000, p.40) are used as common arguments against bureaucracy. The potential use of bureaucracy for the increase of organizational efficiency is examined in this paper. Reference is made to the appropriateness of the bureaucracy for the housing and support organizations. It is proved that bureaucracy can help to the increase of the efficiency of these organizations under the terms that the application of the principles of this concept is closely monitored. The views of Weber on bureaucracy have been employed in this study in order to verify the appropriateness of the specific concept for modern organizations. 2. Weber on bureaucracy Bureaucracy has been extensively examined and analyzed by Weber; in accordance with Weber, bureaucracy should be considered ‘as being superior compared to other forms of administration’ (Morrison, 2006, p.381); the superiority of bureaucracy can be identified to the fact that technically bureaucracy can respond to all administrative needs of organizations – while other forms of administration may fail; however, Weber notes that in order for the superiority of bureaucracy to be established it is necessary for its technical elements to be appropriately promoted (Morrison et al., 2006, p.381). Moreover, it is explained that the superiority of bureaucracy can be identified not only when bureaucracy is compared to current forms of administration but also when comparison is made between bureaucracy and past forms of administration; Weber refers indicatively to ‘the administration by notables and administration by collegiate bodies’ (Morrison et al., 2006, p.381). Dolan et al. (2003) have tried to identify the key role of bureaucracy in organizations – as the specific concept has been described by Weber; their research led to the conclusion that in modern organizations bureaucracy – in accordance with Weber – usually has the following characteristics: a) it requires the introduction of objective rules; emphasis is given on the organizational functions and not on individuals; in this way, equality if promoted across the organization, b) bureaucratic mechanisms – once established – are difficult to be removed or alternated; this can lead to the integration of the organization but it could also result to the decrease of employee satisfaction – a fact that would negatively affect the organizational performance (Dolan et al., 2003, p.8). Another characteristic of bureaucracy – in accordance with Weber – is that the specific scheme can be developed better in the private sector and in societies that are based on capitalism. As noted by Weber, the use of bureaucracy in the public sector is ‘rather the exception than the rule’ (Fischer et al., 1994, p.4). It is assumed that bureaucracy – as described by Weber – can operate more efficiently in modern societies – which are characterized by the support of capitalism in all its forms (Fischer et al., 1994, p.4). The above societies are likely to be highly based on capitalism. From this point of view, in modern societies, bureaucracy can operate effectively both in the private and the public sector – an issue highlighted in the study of Naidu (2005, p.80). In accordance with Naidu (2005) the appropriateness of bureaucracy for modern societies can be derived by the views of Weber who emphasized on its ‘rational-legal character’ (Naidu, 2005, p.82). In accordance with Weber, the characteristics of bureaucracy within organizations could be described as follows: a) the categorization of administrative tasks in hierarchical order, b) the tasks delegated to individuals are clear, c) ‘officials are appointed, not elected’ (Naidu, 2005, p.82), d) each official is delegated a specific task (Naidu, 2005, p.82) and e) the level of remuneration of employees is depended on their position in the organizational hierarchy (Naidu, 2005, p.82). 3. Bureaucracy in housing and support organizations In order to understand the potential role of bureaucracy in housing and support organizations it would be necessary to identify the position of bureaucracy as an indispensable element of the organizational environment. Bureaucracy is a concept that could be applied on modern organizations. This assumption is based on the following views: a) bureaucracy ‘is used for the promotion of capitalism’ (Weber in Morrison et al., 2006, p.381), b) bureaucracy as a term expresses a series of processes developed within a particular order; within organization usually can have the form of official duties (Calhun et al 2007, p.264). Housing Associations in Britain are supported financially by the state – through appropriately customized funding schemes (Williams et al., 1997, p.104); in this way, their administrative tasks need to be monitored – ensuring that the public funds are effectively invested. On the other hand, the power of housing associations in Britain is limited - being clearly defined in the contracts on which these associations are based (Dunn, 2000, p.111); however, the role of these organizations in the protection of public interest is important – taking into consideration the fact that the percentage of British owning a house has reached the 70% in 1990s (Savage et al., 1995, p.80). In order to evaluate the role of bureaucracy in housing and support organizations, it would be necessary to identify the potential forms of bureaucracy in the specific organizations. Using the principles of bureaucracy, the housing and support organizations should be organized as follows: a) specific tasks should be allocated to each employee, b) the relationships between employees would be formal, c) the compensation of employees would be clearly defined in advance; there would be no differentiation in accordance with the employee’s performance, d) the promotion of employees should be based on their skills, e) the officials should give their orders to the employees in the lower level of the organizational hierarchy. At this point, the following issues would appear: a) the personnel of housing associations might not be able to respond to the needs of bureaucratic schemes in regard to the administration of these organizations, b) housing associations are related to specific human needs – it would be very difficult for these organizations to be de-humanized, as bureaucracy asks. The example of a well-known housing association in Britain can be used in order to show the potential implications of bureaucracy for the organizations of the particular sector. The Homes and Communities Agency is one of the major Housing Associations in Britain. The specific organization is based on the principles of equality and diversity (organization’s website) emphasizing on the cooperation and communication for addressing the relevant needs of citizens. The organization employees individuals with various skills; performance is used for the remuneration of employees in various positions, i.e. the organization uses a performance-based payment scheme. On the other hand, the hours of working are not standardized; a flexible mode of work has been introduced in order to increase employee satisfaction (organization’s website, careers, benefits). It is clear that bureaucracy is not applied on the specific organization – at least not in all its forms. The hierarchy in tasks and orders (as required in bureaucracy) cannot be clearly identified in the specific organization; bureaucracy could only involved in the power of the official/ managers to give orders and delegate tasks. 4. Conclusion Bureaucracy is a concept that can help towards the improvement of organizational efficiency – in the context described above. However, bureaucracy does not equally perform in organizations of all types. The potentials of an organization to adopt the rules of bureaucracy are differentiated – in accordance with the organizational culture and needs. Moreover, the role of each organization in its environment has to be taken into consideration in order to decide whether the specific organization could be restructured using the rules of bureaucracy. In the case, of the housing associations in Britain, the potential establishment of bureaucratic mechanisms would lead to the increase of these associations’ performance; however, in the long term, the role of these organizations within the British society could be negatively affected; the priorities of these organizations’ planners should be carefully considered. The key question should be whether organizations, which have been established in order to serve specific human needs, can be de-humanized. References Ambrose, P. (1994) Urban process and power. Routledge Balchin, p., Rhoden, M. (2002) Housing policy: an introduction. Routledge Calhoun, C., Gerteis, J. (2007) Classical sociological theory. Wiley-Blackwell Dolan, J., Rosenbloom, D. (2003) Representative Bureaucracy: Classic Readings and Continuing Controversies. M.E. Sharpe Du Gay, P. (2000) In praise of bureaucracy: Weber, organization, ethics. SAGE Dunn, A. (2000) The voluntary sector, the state and the law. Hart Publishing Fischer, F., Sirianni, C. (1994) Critical studies in organization and bureaucracy. Temple University Press Goose, N., Moden, L. (2010) A History of Doughtys Hospital, Norwich, 1687-2009. University of Hertfordshire Press Homes and Communities Agency (2010), online, available from http://www.homesandcommunities.co.uk/ Honeyford, R. (1998) The Commission for Racial Equality: British bureaucracy and the multiethnic society. Transaction Publishers Morrison, K. (2006) Marx, Durkheim, Weber: formations of modern social thought Sociology Series. SAGE Naidu, S. (2005) Public Administration: Concepts And Theories. New Age International Pawson, H., Mullins, D. (2003) Changing places: housing association policy and practice on nominations and lettings. The Policy Press Savage, M., Barlow, J. (1995) Property, Bureaucracy and Culture: Middle Class Formation in Contemporary Britain. Routledge Williams, P., Holmans, A. (1997) Directions in housing policy: towards sustainable housing policies for the UK. SAGE Read More