day 3 ead 800 valbonne 04 structural theories. today’s topics: weberian bureaucracy types of...
TRANSCRIPT
Day 3EAD 800 Valbonne 04
Structural Theories
Today’s topics:
Weberian bureaucracyTypes of formalizationProfessionalism vs bureaucracyLoose couplingCase studyHypotheses
Weberian bureaucracy:
Division of laborSpecializationImpersonal orientationHierarchy of authorityRules and regulationsCareer orientation
Weberian bureaucracy:Experience tends to universally show that the purely bureaucratic type of administrative organization…is, from a purely technical point of view, capable of attaining the highest degree of efficiency” (Weber, 1947).
Functions and dysfunctions of Weberian Model:
Characteristic
Function Dysfunction
Division of Labor Expertise Boredom
Impersonal Orientation
Rationality Lack of morale
Hierarchy of Authority
Disciplined compliance and coordination
Communication blocks
Rules and regulations
Continuity and uniformity
Rigidity and goal displacement
Career orientation Incentive Conflict between achievement and seniority
Integration of Formal and Informal Systems
Activities Interaction
Sentiments
Activities Interaction
Sentiments
FORMAL INFORMAL
ENVIRONMENT – Physical, technical, social
Hierarchy
Division of Labor
Formalization
Impersonality
Formal Communication and Leadership
Informal structure
Division into cliques
Informal norms
Personal relations
Informal communication and Leadership
Critiques of Weberian Bureaucracy
Feminist critiqueEmphasis on full-time commitmentPerpetuation of male dominationDoes not contribute to development of groupControl function
Post-modern critiqueInformation-basedHeroic leader impossiblePsychological needs of workersPower of relationshipsComplexity and change increase interdependenceDiminished loyalty, security
Two types of formalization
Enabling bureaucracy
2 way communicationLearn through problemsMutual solutionValues differencesOpennessDelight in unexpectedSupport for risktakingParticipative decisionsProblem-solving focus
Coercive bureaucracyTop down communicationConstrained by problemsForced consensusValues samenessWatchful mistrustFear of unexpectedPunish mistakesUnilateral decision makingAuthority focus
(Adler & Borys, 1996)
Another way to conceptualize rational organizations: Bureaucratic vs.
Professional
BureaucraticHierarchy of authorityRules for incumbentsProcedural specificationsImpersonality
ProfessionalTechnical competenceSpecialization
Are educators professionals?Provide essential services to societyConcerned with identified area of needInvolved in decision-making in service to clientCollectively, and individually, professionals possess a body of knowledgeBased on one or more undergirding disciplinesOrganized into professional associations which control work of the profession (licensing, standards, ethics, discipline, etc.)Inducted through long preparation programHigh level of public trust and respectPractitioners characterized by lifetime commitment to competenceAccountability to the profession and to clientRelative freedom from direct on-the-job supervision and from direct public evaluation
Typology of School Organizational Structure
Professional
Pattern
Bureaucratic Pattern
High Low
High Weberian Authoritarian
Low Professional Chaotic
Similarities and Differences in Professional and Bureaucratic Organizations
SimilaritiesTechnical expertiseObjective
perspectiveImpersonal/
impartialService to clients
ConflictOrientation:
colleague or organization
Decisions: autonomy or compliance
Control: self-imposed or superimposed
Loose coupling – another organizational perspective of schools
Loose coupling theorists focus on the disconnectedness of behavior and outcomes in organizations. Loose coupling connotes weak or infrequent ties between elements that are minimally interdependent (Weick, 1976).
Loose coupling
“In schools, there is loose control over how well the work is done. Inspection of instructional activities is infrequent, and even when evaluation does occur, it is usually perfunctory. Under these conditions, tight organizational controls over who does the work – through such activities as hiring, certifying, and scheduling – are exerted.” (Hoy, Miskel)
Managing change in rational system
“Find goals and or means that can be evaluated easily and to which the participants can commit themselves. It is assumed that if relevant information is gathered to define the problem properly and if the resistance of recalcitrant parties is overcome, then a decision can be made that will correct any problems. In this view, a fairly stable group of decision makers who agree on goals and technology is managing change.”
Managing change in an open system
Concentrate efforts on one or two critical problemsLearn the history of an issue, including when it came up, who took what positions, who won, who lostBuild coalitions to mobilize supportUse the formal system of committee memberships and the informal system of discussions and mediation
(Berger, 1981)
Bees and FliesExperimentation, persistence, trial and error, risks, improvisation, one best way, detours, confusion, rigidity, randomness.
Tightness and looseness
Weick’s interestHigh differentiation – low integration
Such systems may appear ineffective when assessed by criteria tied to efficiency, but may be more effective when assessed against criteria that index flexibility, ability to improvise, and capacity for self-design.
Holographic organization – loosely coupled
Principle 1 – Build the “whole” into the partsVisions, values and culture as corporate
DNANetworked intelligenceStructures that reproduce themselvesHolistic teams; diversified roles
Holographic organization – loosely coupled
Principle 2 – The importance of redundancyIn information processingIn skills and design of work
Holographic organization – loosely coupled
Principle 3 – Requisite varietyInternal complexity must match that of the environment
Holographic organization – loosely coupled
Principle 4 – Minimum SpecsDefine no more than is absolutely necessary
Holographic organization – loosely coupled
Principle 5 – Learn to learnScan and anticipate environmental changeDouble-loop learningEmergent design
Organizational changeLoose coupling is the source of adaptability in most organizations, whereas tight coupling is the source of most adaptation.In a loosely-coupled organization, there is less necessity for major change because change is continuous. If major change becomes necessary, however, it is much harder to diffuse it among systems that are loosely-coupled.
Organizational Change
A tightly coupled system may be slow to innovate yet retain the privilege of “historic backwardness” that allows it to benefit from the lessons of the more loosely coupled systems that made the first innovation. The efficiencies that accompany tight coupling may then allow those organizations that are second on the scene to grind up those who were first.