Bureaucracy

Bureaucracy refers in its simplest sense to a particular system of administration or organization which
is characteristic of modernity. Usually associated with the work of Max Weber, Weber suggested that it
was the best administrative form for the rational or efficient pursuit of organizational objectives. It is
associated most of all with Weber's conception of the ideal type, which refers to a typification of a
social phenomenon which involves denoting the characteristic elements of many examples of the
phenomenon. The ideal type of bureaucracy comprises various elements:

a high degree of specialization.

a clearly defined division of labour.

the distribution of official tasks within the organization.

a hierarchical structure of authority with clearly defined areas of authority and responsibility.

formal rules which regulate the operation of the organization.

written administration.

a clear separation between what is official and what is personal.

recruitment of personnel on the basis of ability and technical knowledge.

Weber argued that such organizations were constructed on the basis of rationality. There are two
aspects to rationality:

the rationality of bureaucracy is that it maximizes technical efficiency, with clearly defined
rules which direct the behavior of members in the most efficient way.

a system of control which is accepted by members on the basis that they view the rules as
rational, impartial and fair, known as a legal-rational system.

Sociologists such as K. Merton (1957) have extended Weber's analysis. Merton argues that
bureaucracy becomes inflexible when, for example, rules which are out of date are still applied to
members of the organization. Also members of the organization may apply the rules in a habitual way
which counteracts the aims of the role of the rule. M. Crozier (1964) has argued that members of the
organization often pay lip service to rules and bend them when they have the opportunity, thus
making the bureaucratic procedures ineffective. In addition, Crozier has demonstrated that
standardized rules are not able to cope with unexpected and unpredictable occurrences.
An example of bureaucracy and rationality within modernity is the German war machine. Zygmunt
Bauman in his study of the Holocaust, Modernity and the Holocaust (1989), referred to the type of
bureaucratic procedures employed by the Nazis as a 'legitimate resident in the house of modernity'.
Specialization of tasks, application of clearly defined rules, together with a clearly defined division of
labour, resulted in a most efficient organization.
Critics have argued that bureaucracies are more suited to a situation where there is predictability,
such as the types of organization characterized by modernity, wherein products were standardized and
produced for a mass market. Therefore they have argued that systems of bureaucracy are less suited
to the post-modern era due to the existence of niche markets which demand specialized tailor-made
and more individualized goods.

Predictability issue: Where even a moderate degree of unpredictability occurs within an organization,
bureaucracy may be particularly ineffective.

Conclusion: It has to be acknowledged that even though Weber believes rationality and efficiency can
be attained through bureaucracy, he was mindful of its shortcomings as evidenced by the fact that he
also associated it with an oppressive routine adverse to personal freedom.
He realizes that bureaucracy limits individual freedom and makes it difficult if not impossible for
individuals to understand their activities in relation to the organization as a whole. Most importantly,
bureaucracy favors what Weber called the crippled personality of the specialties.
Due to the irreconcilable differences between the administrative traditions that were presented by the
founding fathers and the impossibility of managing a modern society without bureaucracy, it is not
surprising that scholars within the field of public administration have so far failed to come up with an
adequate theoretical base to explain the relationship between bureaucracy and representative
government. The changes that have taken place within the American society make it clear that the
problems administrators have to contend with do not easily fit the existing structure of hierarchy and
authority based structure.
Hence, the need to restructure or readjust the bureaucracy to adapt to new and complex problems
becomes apparent. Unfortunately, there is no consensus regarding how the restructuring can be done
and this issue will remain one of the hot debates in the field of Industrial Sociology for the coming
decades.