Research Paper
Abstract
Max Weber has greatly influenced both private and public organizations through his conception of bureaucracy, which he describes as the most efficient, productive structure for any formal organization. He developed the six-point ideal type model as a pattern for formal organizations wanting to streamline and rationalize their systems. However, Weber also recognizes some of the disadvantages of bureaucracy, such as its negative impact on employee morale and customer satisfaction and organizational productivity. Trained incapacity is one of the concepts that explain how bureaucratic practices make formal organizations too rigid or inflexible. This paper critically evaluates and discusses Weber's model of bureaucracy and rationality, with an analysis of a specific case to demonstrate the application of his ideas to actual practice.
German sociologist Max Weber introduced a model that showed the bureaucratic type as being the most effective means of structuring government departments. His ideas were widely adopted in both private and public organizations. Although his ideas have also been extensively criticized, the bureaucratic structure remains alive today. Weber also developed a six-point ideal type model, which is composed of six key premises: a formal hierarchical system; rule-based management; coordination through functional forte; an 'in-focused' or 'up-focused' mission; deliberately indifferent or impartial; and, recruitment, selection, and hiring based on merit or technical expertise (Du Gay, 2000). Likewise, the five characteristics constituting Weber's ideal type are as follows: division of labor, hierarchy of authority, rules and regulations, qualification-based employment, and impersonality (Kendall, 2015, 152). However, one can more fully understand these six ideals by means of an accurate example. A perfect illustration of Weber's bureaucratic form is the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), but does it espouse the six-point ideal type model?
The IRS is the U.S. federal government's revenue service agency. The department is part of the Department of the Treasury, and tasked to collect taxes and interpret and implement the Internal Revenue Code (Gormley & Balla, 2012). First, the agency has a formal hierarchical structure, which is headed by the Commissioner or Chief of Staff. Second, the agency follows a rule-based management, which ensures that decisions reached at the top are carried out routinely by those at the bottom. Third, the agency's operations are performed by specialists, and individuals are structured into sub-departments (e.g. Appeals, Communications and Liaison, National Taxpayer Advocate, Office of Compliance Analytics) based on the skills or expertise they possess (Gormley & Balla, 2012). Fourth, the agency's mission is up-focused, which means that its goal is to serve its stakeholders-- the taxpayers. Fifth, the agency strives to promote cultural diversity within its workforce and does not allow individual and cultural differences to influence its operations. And, sixth, the agency hires only qualified individuals or conducts its staffing procedures based on technical qualifications.
Even though Weber approves of bureaucracy as the most productive, capable form of organization, he admitted that bureaucracy's formal rationality would result in socially unfavorable consequences. Primarily, Weber claimed that bureaucracy stood for “the concentration of the material means of management in the hands of the master” (Rehmann, 2014, 110). On the other hand, even though Weber was profoundly focused on the societal repercussions of bureaucracy, others have placed emphasis on the internal drawbacks of bureaucracy. The well-known Parkinson's Law explains that task always broadens to meet the time given for its fulfillment. As stated in this theory, there is practically no connection between the number of tasks to be carried out and the number of employees tasked to do it. Hence, although there are more employees than required to complete a specific number of tasks, people tasked to do the job will always have a greater amount of free time, and their superiors may even think that they have to hire more employees (Rehmann, 2014). Parkinson's Law is apparently designed to demonstrate squandering in bureaucracies.
When tasks are specialized, as in the case of bureaucracies, there is the likelihood that it would be tedious and boring; this can result in indifference and lack of interest in some workers and could also result in discontentment. Workers are not evaluated on how they can remarkably perform a task but on how they accomplish their major tasks. With bureaucratic system owning greater control, workers become submissive, vulnerable, and apathetic to the organization's objectives. Simply put, bureaucracy as described by employees and customers is a range of adverse behaviors, attitudes, or factors that are unfavorable to employees and customers (Tischler, 2013). Bureaucracy is detrimental to organizational productivity. It undermines employee satisfaction, motivation, and morale. It nurtures conflict among individuals within the organization, and misleads their energy into rivalry or disagreement with one another rather than into the accomplishment of the organization's mission. Some key reasons why bureaucracies are resistant to change were identified (Kendall, 2015). As explained by Whimster and Lash (2014), these involve the abrupt and ambiguous way by which change is initiated; fear of job loss; absence of goal transparency; comfort with prevailing conditions; conflict between the higher management and employees; absence of employees' involvement and interest in change; and, poor non-financial and financial incentives given to public servants.
It has been observed that the fixation of bureaucrats with rules and procedures brings about incapability to adjust to evolving situations. Veblen named such occurrence as 'trained incapacity', or when government employees are instructed to perform tasks in a specific way, they become unable to carry them out in any other way (Tischler, 2013). Thus, bureaucracy becomes an inflexible entity that is unable to improve or change its behavior. What begins as a productive way of governing the modern state could turn out to be unproductive; it could even go against democratic ideals if trained incapacity discourages the sympathetic, prompt, and competent distribution of public services.
Social relationship, rooted in informal structure, is unavoidable in all formal organizations. There are hence structures of social and personal relationships which are not needed or, at times, allowed by formal organizations and emerge naturally (Rehmann, 2014). Informal relations arise due to various reasons and fulfill particular roles. Preservation of rigid formal impersonal relations, as visualized by ideal-typical bureaucratic standards, in reality may not merely be unlikely, but rationally incompatible as regards the accomplishment of bureaucratic objectives (Gormley & Balla, 2012). Hence specific forms of informal relations could enhance productivity and be indispensable. Development of informal relations as regards bureaucratic goal attainment could be positive or negative. Simply put, it could be advantageous or disadvantageous to a bureaucracy. Informal relations could provide a sense of stability and protection to people working in a formal impersonal bureaucracy. It simply becomes a tool for tension or conflict management (Whimster & Lash, 2014). On the other hand, one of the major disadvantages of informal relations is its tendency to alienate the individual from the overall goal of the formal organization.
Conclusions
In summary, as explained by Weber, individuals in present-day societies prefer rationality-- a frame of mind that focuses on a factual assessment of the most productive means of carrying out a task. Individuals in rational societies measure possible benefits and costs of their decisions, calculating job opportunities, and so on. The emergence of the Industrial Revolution and capitalism are proofs of the existence of rational societies, the shift from traditional thinking to rational thinking as the major frame of mind. For Weber, bureaucracy is highly essential because it is the arsenal of a potent type of formal rationality. This form of rationality as envisioned by Weber was comprised in the bureaucratic structure's formal rules and procedures. As discussed above, there are key features of rational formal organization, namely, impersonality, technical efficiency, timeliness, self-control, specialized tasks, sizable organizations, and special social institutions.
References
Du Gay, P. (2000). In praise of bureaucracy: Weber- organization-- ethics. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Gormley, W. & Balla, S. (2012). Bureaucracy and democracy: accountability and performance. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Kendall, D. (2015). Sociology in our times: the essentials. Mason, OH: Cengage Learning.
Parkin, F. (2014). Max Weber. London: Routledge.
Rehmann, J. (2014). Max Weber: modernization as passive revolution: a Gramscian analysis. Boston: BRILL.
Tischler, H. (2013). Cengage advantage books: introduction to sociology. Mason, OH: Cengage Learning.
Whimster, S. & Lash, S. (2014). Max Weber, rationality and modernity. London: Routledge.
