Introduction
Bureaucracy as a management of an organization by non-elected officials has long been there in society and firms since 20th century. This form of organization is prevalent both in the public and private sector. The evidence of techno-management or technology management being usurped by bureaucracy is plentiful. For example, techno-managers need for control and domination is evidenced by their language at work by use of words and phrases such as “how many people work for you?”, “subordinates,” “my people” and “staying on top of things,” etc. These indicate the necessity of separating bureaucracy from techno-management; while doing so, one encounters many difficulties of application and depth. The techno-manager would cost cut that is alright in the short run, while this strategy fails in the long run. The lower executive in a techno-managed firm usually derives information from committees and even more few channels that collect field inputs, accountants aren’t working on real numbers and learning how revenues are being built.
Techno-management of firms and organizations in 21st century are evidently providing a large number of hints at impropriety or improper derivation of knowledge of systems and processes when there is no need of any such motive. Reducing the opportunity of bringing more respect and money to profession of a techno-managed organization, the efforts get misdirected just as they do for quality managers who unintentionally put organization at risk by reducing quality efforts of managers to meagre numbers, charts and graphs. The assertion here is that which is provided in most number of knowledge and technology management books – the use of technology management without knowing form and efficiency parameters leads to deadlier consequences. In wake of using bureaucratic controls and mechanisms the complete perspective to owning and utilizing a techno-managed organization is lost. This in turn leads to mere facades being thrown from management, accountants doing mundane routine activities with less control over learning and other such essential developments.
Some of these impediments to technology management have seen many instances like those discussed in the book “Organizational Culture and Leadership”, by Edgar Schein, Professor of Management at Sloan School of Management. According to Jim, (2014), Prof Edgar states that the following are some of the effects with clear terminology;
- “IT (Information Technology) assumptions about people and learning,”
- “technology leads and people adapt,”
- “all people can and should learn whatever is required to use the technology,”
- “people already know how to communicate and manage; therefore, IT needs only to enhance these processes.”
These and other learning characteristics of a techno-managed firm make it prudent enough to utilize bureaucracy, though not always. Knowing that technology is leading the firm then priorities of processes being used changes. Also people would need to adapt to similar changes in technology. At the outset, he categorizes people who would need to learn about a specific technology before being able to apply it and people who need to enhance their IT processes. Bureaucracy management, on the other hand, envisages non-elected people coming together for building processes and methods under well-defined legal decision-making rules to fulfil needs of a hierarchical organization. These and other conflict is formulated for a techno-manager. In words of Ted Levitt, “The practice of management is badly misunderstood by management scientists who confuse thinking with merely being logical.”
Bureaucratic Management Theory
The bureaucratic management theory has followed form, from the Industrial revolution and challenges stemming from the developments therein. The theoretical basis follows the treatise of Taylor’s scientific management, Weber’s ideal bureaucracy and Crozier’s theory of the scientific dysfunction. The theory of scientific management from Taylor follows the following important conclusions from the study of human behaviour at work in a systematic manner. His rationale indicated that workers from an engineering industry and in repetitive jobs would work at slower rates than they could (soldering). Cause of this was ignorance and poor job design, while including idea of ‘one best method’ and when explained properly to workers, the productivity increases to benefit both workers and company. The efforts paid off, and results in this experiment were profound. Productivity had increased dramatically; products were complex and standardized to enhance the quality. Within the factory, a growing layer of middle management grew from separation of planning from execution. Newer departments are made, scientific rules replacing thumb rules, and formal management followed.
Max Weber later provided the bureaucratic theory of management where Bureaucracy is the division of labour applied to administration. It is ruled through a desk or office or a form of organization that prepares and dispatches written documents. Weber thus was confident of Ideal bureaucracy devoted to the principle of efficiency from maximizing output whilst minimizing inputs. Thus, his belief is that an organization is a continuous hierarchy, where each level is being controlled by the level above it. Each position exists in own right while job holders are having no rights to one position in particular. Responsibilities get clearly delineated, and an appointment is based on technical competence. More efficient and stable bureaucracies would become much more prevalent in society.
Michel Crozier was far ahead of his times when he included his treatise with Bureaucracy and provided an analytic dysfunction based on case studies. He said that a dysfunction can be observed in many situations with characteristic features. In situations where every outcome is in advance, the only way for people to gain control is exploit any remaining ‘zones of uncertainty’. Organizational relations become lesser in this by gaining control over ends or preventing others. This results in an organization which is locked with the inward looking power struggle or vicious struggle that prevents learning from errors. Bureaucratic personnel imply impersonal rules to cover up resulting in hierarchical relations being less important and senior levels loosing governance. Secondly, decisions are to be made by people who are more likely to get affected, resulting in most problems resolved by people having no prior knowledge of affliction. Thirdly, an opportunity for bargaining and negotiation when eliminated causes the organization to create a series of isolated strata. Resultant is peer group pressure conforming norms of strata regardless of goals and beliefs. Finally, individuals gaining control over uncertainty zones wield disproportionate power leading to parallel power structures in turn resulting in decisions made on unrelated factors. In the latter half of 20th century the treatise of Ronald Coase in 1937 who won Nobel in 1991 said that corporations are necessary due to “transaction costs”. These are complicated and costly, due to searching right worker for the task, supplies or prices, police or protecting trade secrets. A corporation is essentially not good for allocating between labour and capital while it made up by increasing transaction costs. Even more recently, Don Tapscott and Anthony Williams, authors of the book "Wikinomics," have predicted rise of "mass collaboration" as the new form of economic organization. Corporate hierarchies will disappear; individuals form a new era, like the Italian renaissance or the rise of Athenian democracy according to Alan, (2010).
Advantages and disadvantages of Application of the Bureaucratic Management Theory in Contemporary Technology Management Practice
Bureaucracy can have limited benefits and advantages leading to the overall development of techno-managed organization. In terms of quantifying the benefits with the losses there are some shades of grey, so the concentration or focus is on the benefits minus the losses. The advantages of the bureaucracy form of control in an organization are following;
- Impersonality of bureaucracies can have benefits. There is less favouritism for friends and known people helping in completing applications or getting things done. Also, all are treated equally in the process or event for which one ascertains bureaucracy.
- It may have positive effects on employees. The laments of bureaucracy in stifled imagination and creativity are simply not there. Social research has shown employees are much better intellectually in bureaucratic environments. Bureaucrats are much better in self-confidence, intellectually, self-direction and being open minded.
- Greater job security from bureaucratic organizations is in the form of salary, perks, insurance policies and others.
Disadvantages of bureaucracies
- Rules and blind adherence to rules in a bureaucratic setup of the organization allow senior people with authority and dominating control to leverage into much favourable position at other’s costs.
- Parkinson law is about work creating more work and bureaucracies typically growing at a rate of more than 6% annually. Managers are busier completing their work and hire employees requiring more time in supervision. Current year expenses determine following year budget is also expected. There is the notion that views such as these are consistent with conflict theorists and that it serves only managers in turn allowing them to increase dominating power over workers.
- Peter Principle states that usually the employees are promoted according to their level of incompetency. A competent manager is continually promoted until he/she is incompetent at a position. Bureaucracy can only work until the employees are working continuously at the organization ladder for growing at a more competent position. Sophie, (2014).
Neutralizing disadvantages of Bureaucratic Management theory
Promoting decisive solutions to the application of management theory in bureaucratic setting and technology managed organization can reap huge advantages. Even more the ability to promote such solutions need to be assessed for their continuity and validity in response to authentic information and details. Neutralizing the disadvantage in a techno managed firm the efforts in determining equal opportunity for work, equal pay for both genders and promoting policy for maternity leave are structures that alleviate the problems many organizations face. Other initiatives involve streamlined organization, culture and productivity concepts. Once a techno managed firm ascertains bureaucratic control with improbable application, relations between present and future aims, innovation and autonomy can be easily included to dissolve negative effects.
Between the depth of innovation and the leverage of autonomy or control there is also dominance from organizational hierarchy (bureaucracy). Once the organization decides to become a better technology managed firm, this would follow. Analysis of such relations can be achieved from regular monitoring of goals in employee productivity, absenteeism, social cultural initiatives, corporate social responsibility goals and developing enriched lifestyle of workers. Job security of techno managed firm along with the management structure resulting from these efforts could alleviate the problem of utilizing the bureaucratic structure in 21st century organization. The developing problems could range from speeding change to accelerating diminishing costs in the latter half of 21st century. Management models of past century are in need of serious rethink. While it took Forbes 100 firms to reach global scale of operations it took Facebook 2 years and computers 4 years to achieve the same result. Thus, rapidly decreasing costs, faster changes in a techno managed organization are posing enormous difficulty in ascertaining operations planning and implementation in the face of scarce resources. Quality and resultant product viability in market and consumerism are additional aspects. Therefore to counter bureaucratic mismatch with technology supported platform in organization one would need to adopt more succinct procedures and new planned mechanisms before capital and technological obsolescence set in. Thereby the efforts from using effective policy in lieu of streamlined budgeting and innovation according to Styhre, (2007), is when an organization can leverage to take techno managed firm from bureaucracy to a modern organization. It is also known that Jack Welch from General Electric had to fight bureaucracy. In a similar light, many other organizations like Banks have been able to neutralize bureaucratic wrangle (implementing Basel reforms), firms like Amazon and Dell have achieved great success. These organizations leveraged competitive platform with innovation, standardized quality scoring and market development planning to become a behemoth in advanced technology management with bureaucracy in their environments, employee relations and subsequent efforts.
Conclusion
The ability of techno managed organization to alleviate or lessen the techno bureaucracy in overemphasizing effects of disadvantages in meeting classification to goals, operational challenges in low budgeted firm is recognized. Managing technology and scientific product in ever changing market and faster processing makes bureaucracy in these firms different from nature of relations, autonomy, innovation, impact of social cultural classes, employee – employer pedigree and valuation. In other words, the belongingness of technology in an organization cannot be denied under exceptional bureaucracy while more significant options in excellence need new ideas in management philosophy.
Many new firms like Google, Amazon, Dell and Twitter use different technology management capabilities in different settings to achieve results. Google uses a policy of “20%”. The operational time of 20% from overall work time is allowed on other projects than the total of projects assigned to employee engineers. It has led to innovation where scientific products have developed within techno-bureaucracy environment. Google News has been one such innovative product. Engineers need not compete for funding, and this practice is not likely similar to a marketplace. The Google way has proven how to generate ever more incremental profits.
Similarly, Twitter has a business model of marketing social networking. They have found a way to deliver results in low-cost structuring, innovation in social marketing model whilst branding strongly to get a very high rating on usage, market development and subsequently profits. The innovation does not die; the float of model allows user satisfaction to gain more customization and customers in a progressive mathematical model.
Many more examples exist where the individual organization facing the bureaucracy in technological management would need better leverage and strong guidance to deliver from breakneck speed of change and process operations. Even though the control dominance of people in authority with significant domains under control, the efficiency determined in a techno managed organization can and possibly be built using advances in management. Crozier was not wrong of possible dysfunction and Coase of transaction costs. In the 21st century, bureaucracy in organizations has been influenced by everything happening since last 100 years or so to get where it is today.
A possible demarcation of techno-bureaucracy as three waves is possible. The first wave of 1992- is about reengineering CRM, ERP and the like solutions for fast technological change in organizations. The second wave is 1997- onwards of new business models endorsed by entrepreneurs from Google and Amazon while the third wave 2000- is of new management models according to Gary, (2014).
Beginning the study of techno-bureaucracy from this wave understanding becomes the perspective to generate ever more benefit of management philosophy in present time for a technology managed organization. Technological obsolescence rewarded management models and newer profit models in the bureaucracy control in techno managed firms is beginning to reap dimensions of bright prospects and future for evangelists, entrepreneurs and management scientists. The probable solutions of managing bureaucracy from innovation streamlined budgeting and models of inter-temporal choices like decision trees and Monte Carlo simulations could hold few benefits while examples of successful application also exist in numerous organizations.
The problem of a bureaucracy evident from the nature of delegation of control, an organizational structure for competence also with supplement of work ethics and guidelines interpret the technology. The technology management adheres to gaining knowledge fast and complete of any new product or service, working with adapting for change. Knowing few choices would exceptionally well be assuaged by those in domination of organizational control, it is in favour of lowering transaction costs while using effective concepts and applications. As fast as change surrounds innovation and budgeting for effective control, one also must acknowledge the ability of technology management in neutralizing the disadvantages of bureaucracy. This is due to better management model like leveraging employee rewards for competence mapping and policy changes to effectively mitigate risk from newer challenges.
Within the last decade, the growth of entrepreneurship and small to mid market segment has proven the reverse to technology management from two views – one technology for mass production and second technology utility in every setting. Thus, some technology selling firms are usually not favoured due to a reduced market share. Within this the utility of technology for a consumer is rendered ineffective with new user focussed and pliable products entering competition. Hence, every latest technology is being supported to the market by large organizations in contrast to smaller organizations. Therefore technology adoption, rate of technology dissemination and technology in a bureaucratic control setting is hardly recognizable to a new learner. So learning effects and simultaneous functionality of techno-bureaucracy from management model would indeed be the next turning or pivot point. Firms like Dell, Amazon, EBay, Twitter and Facebook have high success. This is due to fact that these organizations have been steady at bringing a total result not only from adoption in management, operations but also effectiveness and planned implementation. Techno-management is thus a cornerstone of strategic opportunity than an impediment for large organizations, while smaller firms get to it using market competitiveness, better systematic operations for efficiency and early adoption.
References
Jim Clemmer (2014). Technomanagement: A Deadly Mix of Bureaucracy and Technology. Retrieved from http://www.clemmergroup.com/articles/technomanagement-deadly-mix-bureaucracy-technology/
Gary Hamel (March10, 2014). The next tech revolution: Busting bureaucracy. Fortune. Retrieved from http://fortune.com/2014/03/10/the-next-tech-revolution-busting-bureaucracy/
Alan Murray (2010). The end of Management. The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved from http://online.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748704476104575439723695579664
Sophie Johnson (2014). Advantages & Disadvantages of Bureaucratic Organizational Structure. Demand Media. Retrieved from http://yourbusiness.azcentral.com/advantages-disadvantages-bureaucratic-organizational-structure-11579.html
Styhre, Alexander (2007). The Innovative Bureaucracy: Bureaucracy in an age of fluidity. Routledge Taylor and Francis Publishers.
