Outline the nature of Bureaucracy and assess the Limitations of this Organizational Design
Name:
Course Name:
Tutor:
Date:
TABLE OF CONTENTS:
Abstract——————————————————————————————————–3
Overview of Bureaucracy ———————————————————————————-4
Introduction—————————————————————————————————5
Characteristics and Limitations of Bureaucratic Organization————————————5
Power and Decision Making Process———————————————————–5
Internal Communication System—————————————————————-6
Change Management——————————————————————————7
Efficiency and Bureaucracy———————————————————————-8
Merits of Bureaucratic Perspective of Organizational Structure———————————-9
Conclusion—————————————————————————————————11
Reference—————————————————————————————————–12
Abstract:
The advent of industrial revolution and then intermarried with high rates of globalization and the undying desire for organizations to have more power led to development of various types of organizational cultures and structures. While the ideological perspectives of social scientists like Max Weber and McGregor among other important figures in the field of organizational behaviour immensely changed the way in which an organization was generally looked at, it has generally been assumed that effective functioning of the organization depends on its culture and also its structure. However, scholars have not put enough focus on studying the existing limitations of these structures and cultures. This is in spite of the rapid globalization and the general change in the global business environment. Therefore, the impact of organization design and structure have on the functioning of the organization have been assumed. However, researchers and managers must look deeper into the weaknesses as the organization design forms an important part of its existence.
This paper aims to look at the limitations that accompany bureaucracy as a form of organizational design or structure and how the identified weaknesses relate to the success of the whole organization in achieving the desired goals and objectives in this period of globalization. In order to do this, the paper assesses the existing body of literature which helps in coming up with an introductory summary of bureaucracy and later comes up with preliminary practical support derived from common perspectives held by the analyzed literature.
Overview of Bureaucracy
A bureaucracy can be described as a pyramid type of organization wherein the top most position is held by the person with the ultimate authority. As the levels descend so does the degree and gamut of authority associated with the positions till it reaches the rank and file of the bureaucracy. The main characteristic of a bureaucracy lies in the fact that each lower level of the organization is responsible to the upper level (Weber, 1946). That is though each level has authority of its own, that authority is enjoyed due to the permission of those in the position above them.
The bureaucracy is an organizational structure wherein a group of professionals functions under the umbrella of compartmentalized rules and regulations. Each official has a strict framework of rules to work with and under as also his authority is charted out and he cannot exceed his boundaries. The interpersonal relationships with his peers as well as his superiors and subordinates are all laid down and they form the foundation of his working. Thus, though he may enjoy authority, it is subject to the wishes of his boss and also if he falls from grace, there is every chance that he may lose his position and thus the power. In summary, the bureaucratic
It was the German sociologist, Maximilian Carl Emil “Max” Weber who first defined the distinctive features of bureaucracy and laid the path for others to further define and refine theories about bureaucracy. As per Weber, the uniqueness of a bureaucracy is due to the structure of authority in the organization as well as the ubiquity of division of labour which pinpoints exactly the function and job of each individual which are described in detail by the system that dictates the behaviour of the individuals in the organization.
Introduction
While change is inevitable in the business environment, it is one of the facets of organizational environment that pose great risk to any organizational structure and therefore every organization must struggle to align its culture with the prevailing paradigm shift so that it is not left behind. Because of the varied types of tasks and functions handled by different levels of the management, communication becomes a very important tool in making change a success and an integral part of the organizational culture. This is because every unit of the organization must know what change is to be adopted so that they all align themselves toward achieving the same objectives.
The Economist Intelligent Unit (2008) reports that businesses that have problems in dealing with people issues cannot successfully embrace change because communicating the desired change becomes very difficult hence restructuring is hindered (also Herod 2009). An environment of communication is therefore essential to ensure smooth transition during the adoption of the desired change. This forms a central part of various organizational designs where each design has its own way of dealing with issues that face it.
Characteristics and Limitations of Bureaucratic Organization
Power and Decision Making Process
The salient feature of a bureaucratic organization is probably the fact that it entails very strict decision making process where power is a very important part of the process of decision making. It is this centralized decision making process that gives a particular individual in the organization the utmost authority to influence events in the organizations. This aspect raises concerns of the ability of the bureaucratic setup to solve all problems that face the organization. With the modern aspect of globalization, many problems face the organization and therefore endowing one individual with the power to make decisions and offer solutions to problems, then it adds up to giving individuals who do not have relevant knowledge in certain fields to provide solutions. This ultimately adds to political service as opposed to creating efficiency and effectiveness in the organization.
Internal Communication system
One of the major challenges brought by the advent of globalization is ensuring an effective and efficient communication system in the organization. An internal communication system is an essential item of the organization for guaranteeing a productive workforce through effective communication with the organization’s employees. This means that the success of the system goes beyond the relaying of information from supervisor to employee or employee to employee. Creativity must be carefully incorporated into the system while at the same time maintaining consistency and following through to ascertain effectiveness intended. It is obvious that a typical business organization will face various situations, desirable and undesirable. An effective communication program put in place gives a better avenue or platform to keep the employees informed of both situations as they occur.
Even though exciting developments in the organization may motivate the employees in one way or another, argue Smith and Mounter (2005), creativity is necessary when communicating the various situations so that nothing is put out of the actual measure. For instance, the managers might be tempted to exaggerate on the unachieved goals while under- representing the achieved ones. Employees will feel there is no honesty on the part of the management and may not give their full cooperation when it comes to achieving change in the organization. The essence of communication should lie in giving the employees more inspiration to achieve the desired organizational goals.
Change Management
A good strategy for implementing change in organization must be systematic involving careful evaluation of the organization’s present standing and its future. The first step in change is therefore finding out whether the organization needs that change. A change that is necessary is that which solves a known problem to the concerned organization. It implies that finding the source of a problem to an organization goes hand in hand with establishing whether change is desirable or not and it further means that there is recognition of the problem. Bureaucratic organizations do not give ample space to enable this kind of restructuring in shortest time (Lambert et al 2007)
Secondly, the management needs to decide on the change. This will entail identifying all the relevant obstacles that might impede achieving the desired change. The obstacles, of course, can only be identified after the management has attempted to determine the organization’s future state. The management will find it relevant and resourceful to model the future company in operation by deciding precisely what it will be like. By making such a model, the management can then easily identify impediments that need to be dealt with.
The third step would be implementation of change and at this point, the organization must decide the strategy to use in the implementation. The strategy could be top-down or bottom-up. If the organization decides to implement change through a top-down strategy, it is likely to benefit from the fact that this strategy is fastest at achieving change. However, given that the bottom-up strategy is more gradual, it serves better at eliminating any impediments identified at stage two.
After the change has successfully been implemented, it must be measured against the set yardstick for the level of success to be established (Cavanagh 1994). This is the last stage of managing change in the organization and it entails evaluating the change by comparing the achieved level with a given benchmark or yardstick.This important process of internal communication is challenged by a characteristic feature of a bureaucracy that produces isolated strata within the organization with each stratum tending to resist the pressure to conform to the demands of other parts of the organization.
Efficiency and Bureaucracy
Developing a strong and efficient bureaucracy depends upon the selection process for its members who have to be selected purely on their merit and capability and not because of any other factor (Herod & Wright 2002). Or as Putterman and Rueschemeyer (1992, page 245) explained the Chinese structure of an efficient and effective bureaucracy being dependent upon the selection of a team of dedicated and capable officials who had the interest of the State and its citizens at heart. Such officials align their own goals and interests to be in line with those of the State and hence there is no conflict of interest in their day to day working. Only those officials who have these capabilities inherent in them are to be selected as bureaucrats who will act justly even in the face of strong power and financial wielding cartels (Herod & Wright 2002).
This may not be an exceptional case and could apply to other countries also as Munck (2007) asserated. In Prussia also after the annihilation by Napoleon the entire economy and society was in doldrums and it took the expert team of officials to bring it to normalcy and then on the path to development (Tett 2009)). They were the utopian civil servants who devoted their career and life to serving the State and its citizens much like the modern day technocrats who are highly placed in the Western governments. These modern day servants of the state are very essential for the sustained economic and social development of a country (Gerth et al 1954). They are the epitome of commitment, dedication, integrity, competence, and selfless service to the citizens. All the State has to do is bestow adequate authority, responsibility on the officials so that their behaviour will attract respect, honour and also provide these officials with adequate financial security so that they do not fall prey to temptations.
Such a meritorious officialdom system was embraced by the Western countries nearly after two thousand years of Chinese existence (Fairbank and Reischauer 1979, p.69). The officials must be scrutinized for their integrity, honour, decency, and virtue and their loyalty to those in power must give way to patriotism and work ethics for the general good. It is only then that the economic and social growth will not be hindered by any power wielding group. Though due to globalization there may be incidents of imitation and influences exerting pressure for conformity, the efficient bureaucrat will not concede his principles or yield to temptation (Cox 1997).
There needs to be caution advised over the assigning of powers to the bureaucrats. As Smith and Mounter (2005) argued, if left to itself it will self reproduce like an amoeba and become so large that its usefulness may be put to question. It my however transpire that the bureaucrats serve those whom they had to supervise, the power-to-be using their political, business or financial clout to get the desired obedience from these bureaucrats (Biyanwila, 2006).
Merits of Bureaucratic Perspective of Organizational Structure
The bureaucracy can help to monitor the prices and establish stable prices so that the indigenous manufacturers do not get a raw deal. Maintaining price levels will also help to stabilise the economy and reduce the inequality between the different strata of society and also further the improvement in the standard of living (Tett 2009). Even though the doors might be opened for foreign investments and imports, the bureaucracy can apply some restrictions whereby the local businesses are not put at a disadvantage because if this happens the local economy will fall apart as there will be a severe adverse balance of trade. Therefore care has to be taken to safeguard the local businesses and this is possible only by a vigilant bureaucracy.
Also there should be clear and unambiguous rules and regulations imposed for the importers as well as exporters and there should not be any dual system by giving special concessions to some countries over others. This clear transparency will create confidence in the minds of foreign investors and will help to improve the economic and social life of the importing country (Herod & Wright 2002). Such impartial regulations can be formulated and applied by an efficient bureaucracy only. A democratic government would be most helpful for such a bureaucracy to function effectively. Though in authoritarian or dictatorship the bureaucracy would have no place to function so would the doors are closed for globalization. For productive globalization to exist it is essential that the economy be an open one and liberalization be prevalent otherwise the duties and taxes on imports would deter any foreign investors. The bureaucrat has to judiciously monitor these rules and regulations in such a manner that the investment keep on coming and the indigenous businesses also prosper.
Globalization as the grandeur in the term implies has resulted in the death of many a small businesses or even domestic industries in developing and under developed countries (Herod 2003). The foreign investors with their state of the art technology and strategic management philosophies earn such a high competitive advantage that the local businesses do not stand a chance of surviving in the face of such fierce competition as to quality as well as prices (Herod & Wright 2002). The bureaucracy has to help the local businessmen to be able to compete with these foreigners by providing them capital at liberal terms as well as access to knowledge and information about the latest in technology and machinery and allow import of these technology and machinery.
Conclusion
Having assessed the characteristics of a bureaucratic organization and put the characteristics in a perspective of the globalised business environment with rapid changes and transformation, it is evident that the most feature of globalization that poses a challenge to a bureaucratic organization is the need for quick decision making process with an emphasis on the ability to manage change. We also find that effective internal communication is needed if success is to be promised whenever an organization wishes to carry out any restructuring. Not only that; but even in the day-to-day activities, there must be effective communication going on.
Reference
Bakan (2004), The Corporation: The Pathological Pursuit of Profit and Power. London. Constable
Bauman, Z. (1998), Globalisation: The Human Consequences, Oxford, Polity Press.
Berman, M (1982). All That is Solid Melts Into Air: The Experience of Modernity. London. Verso.
Biyanwila, J (2006), The Privatisation of Electricity in Australia. Unpublished.
Burawoy, M. 2003. For a Sociological Marxism: The Complementary Convergence of Antonio
Cavanagh B., (1994), Global Dreams. New York. Simon and Schuster.
Cox, K.R. (1997) Spaces of Globalisation: Reasserting the Power of the Local. New York: Guilford Press.
Cox, K.R. (1998), ‘Spaces of Dependence, spaces of engagement and the politics of scale, or:
Erikson, E., (1971). Identity, Youth and Crisis. London: Faber.
Fairbank, J K and Reischauer EO 1979. China: tradition and transformation. London: Allen & Unwin
Frank, (2002), One Market Under God:Extreme Capitalism, market populism and the end of economic democracy, London, Vintage Books.
Fromm, E. (1978). To Have or to Be? London. Abacus.
Fromm, E., (1947), Man for Himself: An Inquiry into the Psychology of Ethics, New York, Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Gerth, H., & Mills, C. Wright, (1954). Character and Social Structure, London: Routledge & Keegan Paul.
Gillan, Lambert (2006), ‘The Whitegoods industry’, Waring, Bray, Evolving Employment Relations. Industry Studies from Australia. Sydney. McGraw Hill.
Gouldner, (1954). Patterns of Industrial Bureaucracy, New York: Free Press.
Gramsci and Karl Polanyi. Politics and Society, 31(2): 193-261.
Harvey, D. (1989), The Condition of Postmodernity. Oxford. Blackwell.
Harvey, D. (2000), Spaces of Hope, Edinburgh, EdinburghUniversity Press.
Held D, McGrew A, Goldblatt D, & Perraton J (1999) Global Transformations. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Herod A. (2009), Geographies of Globalization, Oxford, Blackwell.
Herod, A. (2003), ‘The Geographies of Labor Internationalism’, Social Science History, Vol. 27: 4, 501-23.
Herod, A., & Wright, M. W. (2002), Geographies of Power: Placing Scale, Oxford, Blackwell Publishing.
Klein N. (2001). No Logo: No Space, No Choice, No Jobs. London. Flamingo.
Lambert R., Webster, E., & Andries B. (2007), Grounding Globalisation: Labor in the Age of Insecurity. Oxford. Blackwell.
Leys C. (2001), Market Driven Politics: Neoliberal Democracy and the Public Interest. London. Verso.
Looking for local politics’, Political Geography, 17.1, 1-23.
Munck R., (2007). Globalisation and Contestation. London. Routledge.
Putterman, L and D Rueschemeyer (eds.) 1992. State and Market in Development: Synergy or rivalry? London: Lynne Rienner Publishers
Robert O’Brien, Marc Williams (2004), Global Political Economy: Evolution and Dynamics. Hampshire. Palgrave Macmillan.
Smith, L. & Mounter P. (2005) Effective internal communication – Routledge Books
Tett G. (2009), Fools Gold: How Unrestrained Greed Corrupted a Dream, London, Little Brown.
Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.
[order_calculator]