mgmt 861 class 5 (roots of organization theory in social theory: max weber)

MGMT 861MGMT 861Class 5Class 5

(Roots of Organization (Roots of Organization Theory in Social Theory in Social

Theory: Max Weber)Theory: Max Weber)

ACCORDING TO WEBER: ACCORDING TO WEBER:

“Experience tends universally to show that the purely bureaucratic type of organization…is, from a purely technical point of view, capable of attaining the highest degree of efficiency and is in this sense formally the most rational known means of carrying out imperative control over human beings. It is superior to any other form in precision, in stability, in the stringency of its discipline, and in its reliability…”

This is clearly rational and influenced by Marxist philosophy. A response to the domination issues of authoritarian command and “rule of notables.”

MAX WEBER’S BUREAUCRACYMAX WEBER’S BUREAUCRACYDiscussed the highly rational concept of Bureaucracy as an “Ideal Type” – Superior to any other form.

Was concerned with domination that emerged in other forms – imposing will upon other’s behavior (in assigned chapter).

He did NOT invent bureaucracy. He was the first to list the characteristics of a Bureaucracy (see next slide)

Found that organizations having these characteristics tended to survive a long time – Thus more successful than other forms.

© Prentice Hall, 2002

MAX WEBER’S BUREAUCRACYMAX WEBER’S BUREAUCRACY

WEBER’S IDEAL TYPE WAS WEBER’S IDEAL TYPE WAS DESIGNED TO:DESIGNED TO:

Eliminate entrenched patronage

End capricious decision-making by frivolous nobility

Provide a system for managing and performing repetitive tasks that involved little or no discretion

Impose order and efficiency

Create a clear understanding of the service provided and reduce arbitrariness – common goods for all

Ensure clear accountability and limit discretion

Bureaucracy is the Bureaucracy is the Organizational Organizational Equivalent of Equivalent of Democracy’sDemocracy’s“Rule of Law”“Rule of Law”

replacing replacing “Rule of Man”“Rule of Man”

TWO PRIMARY CONTROL TWO PRIMARY CONTROL FUNCTIONS OF RULESFUNCTIONS OF RULES

1. Make organization independent of any one individual over time

2. Make decisions and actions of individuals in different parts of the organization consistent at any given time

EXAMPLES OF CONTINUUM OF EXAMPLES OF CONTINUUM OF ORGANIZATIONSORGANIZATIONS

Very Bureaucratic

NonBureaucratic

Govt Agency

StateDept

Large Business

Corp

IBM

R & DLab

RandCorp

SmallBusiness

Firm

Cy’sSandwich

Shop

LIMITATIONS OF LIMITATIONS OF BUREAUCRATIC MANAGEMENTBUREAUCRATIC MANAGEMENT

Emphasis on machine-type organizations limits human discretion and choice

Emphasis on rules and files in decision-making prevents flexibility

Slow to deal with non-routine problems, limits creativity

Pointed out that bureaucracy often does not offer stability. His research focused on clarifying the social processes which cause different degrees of bureaucratization and its effectiveness.

Felt Weber over-emphasized the technical merit of experts – needed to understand context (e.g., good for doctors, bad for Nazi doctors).

Focused primarily on the differences between punishment-centered and representative bureaucracy.

ALVIN GOULDNER (1954)ALVIN GOULDNER (1954)

Provides a good summary table of the forms of bureaucracy.

Among other things, he discussed:How the way rules are initiated (by agreement or imposition) has an impact.

Two types of authority: incumbency vs. technical competence.

“Red Tape” – would illicit complaints differently for different types of bureaucracy.


“Just as Michels emphasized that democratic forms were destined to be the facades of oligarchical rule, so too did Weber indicate that democracy must abdicate in favor of bureaucracy.”

“For Weber, authority was given consent because it was legitimate, rather than being legitimate because it evoked consent.”

Keep in mind that leaders can lose legitimacy and consent.

QUESTION: Can a “pure” bureaucracy be democratic?


Parsons was a functionalist and believed that you could understand why organizations exist by the way they function in society (fulfill some need). He believed there were three levels of organizational structure:

(1) technical (product that is produced),

(2) managerial (mediates the organization and task environment) and

(3) institutional (relate organization to larger society).

TALCOTT PARSONS (1948)TALCOTT PARSONS (1948)

Organization-Environment relationship was important to Parsons (AGIL theory). Gives some context to Weber’s writings by talking about his life, personality, and career.

Weber’s approach to social science was driven by the thought leaders of Germany at the time, who wished to distinguish the the methodologies of studying the natural sciences from human action.

This is how and why he developed his “ideal type” construct.


With respect to social science, Weber felt that “only by the use of generalized theoretical categories, implicitly or explicitly, that it is logically possible to demonstrate the existence of causal relationships.”

The “ideal type” approach tries to isolate those characteristics deemed most important to the phenomenon being studied.

It does not refer to the normatively preferred type but to the construction of a simplified model that focuses attention on the most salient or distinctive features. Also discussed religion (Hinduism/Confucianism)


Points out Weber’s three basic types of institutionalization of authority:

1. Rational-legal – incumbency of office under rules (bureaucrats)

2. Traditional – by traditions (nobles)

3. Charismatic – different forms of organization can be influenced.

And how these impact organizational structure and stability.


Revisit the discussion of formal and informal organizations.

Bureaucracies are usually the focus of formal processes (“administrative machinery”) and are required in large and complex organizations.

Point out that “Colloquially, the term “bureaucracy” connotes such rule-encumbered inefficiency. In sociology, however, the term is used neutrally to refer to the administrative aspects of organizations.”

BLAU & SCOTT (1962)BLAU & SCOTT (1962)

As with Gouldner, felt bureaucracy was unstable. Organizations are not always rational because people are not always rational (consistent w/Barnard). Different bureaucracies view, adopt, and accept change differently.

Functionalism – The basic tenet of this theoretical framework is that the social consequences of phenomena, not merely their origins, must be taken into account in sociological inquiry.

Discussed “dysfunctions” as indicators of potential modifications of the structure (in Blau’s broader writings).

PETER BLAUPETER BLAU

Not from your readings, but to give you context and a better understanding of Blau’s thoughts:

Functions – observed consequences of social patterns that change existing conditions in the direction of socially valued objectives

Dysfunctions are those observed consequences of social patterns that change existing conditions in the direction opposite to socially valued objectives or which interfere with the attainment of valued objectives. Dysfunctions give rise to structural changes.

PETER BLAU (1955/1963)PETER BLAU (1955/1963)

Studied the problem of overconformity, but showed that it was not a result of resistance to change, overidentification with rules, and/or ritualistic adherence to rules.

Rather, it is due to lack of security in important social relationships in the organization

“A legalistic orientation has some similarities with a ritualistic one; both engender strict conformity with regulations but reduce efficiency in situations not fully covered by regulations.”


Talked about other reasons for displacement of goals – to create positive outcomes as a result of internal change (improve salaries) and to push external social change.

Talked about one department’s unwillingness to change because of the changing duties, roles, and responsibilities; however, this was primarily the attitude of less competent individuals.

Thus, it was not bureaucracy itself, but social insecurity that was the problem and which prevented change.


Was a contemporary of Max Weber and was critical of Marxist Theory and bureaucracy – but was a critic of democracy and capitalism to some degree also.

Developed the “iron law of oligarchy” which helps explain:(1) Why organizations tend to become undemocratic over time(2) Why this results in the subversion of the organization’s original goals

Basically, there are decentralization efforts that split the organization into smaller groups.

MICHELS (1915)MICHELS (1915)

The Iron Law of Oligarchy: Organizations tend to develop interests and perspectives at variance with those of the rank and file. The more ignorant and passive most of the members are, the more freedom the leaders will have to develop and gratify their own special interests. Each organization may have been founded to serve a rationally defined purpose, but in its lifetime the organization tends to become an end in itself or, more precisely, a valuable resource and bulwark for its de facto leadership. What the actual leaders do and say will increasingly be tailored to serve the organization's, or their own, interests, rather than the purposes for which the organization was founded. (Polak, 1993)

MICHELS (1915)MICHELS (1915)

How Marxism and Michels oligarchies impact bureaucracies. Bureaucracy in practice: The federal government and large organizations.

How bureaucracy impacts our roles as faculty members.

Impact of new venture creation, technology and innovation.

What happens when the goals of the organization change, are accomplished, or are no longer achievable? (Tea Party, player fan clubs, election year “get out the vote” organizations)

FINALLY, ALSO CONSIDERFINALLY, ALSO CONSIDER

mgmt 861 class 5 (roots of organization theory in social theory: max weber)

Documents