This paper compares and contrasts the Bureaucracy by
Max Weber and Institutionalized Organizations by Meyer and Rowan, and Myths and
Ceremony. Both works “Bureaucracy” and
“Institutionalized Organizations” incorporate bureaucracy
(control, productivity, efficiency, rationality among others) as normative
prospects in the institutional surroundings. Two factors contribute to formal
organization growth- rational organizations tend to be an effective way of
structuring work, as economies become boundary spanning and complicated (March
& Simon, 2004). The other factor is that people perceive bureaucratic
control important in handling the political processes in addition to the
standardization demanded by political factors. Conversely, the majority of
theories suppose that the existing organizational problems have a connection
with control and coordination resulting to bureaucracy leading to the
organizations functioning in accordance with their plans. The blueprint of the
usual daily activity and rational bureaucracy differentiates the practices and
structures of institutions. Institutional-racy is a term that one can use to
blend the two perspectives together.
According to Rowan and Meyer, people typically
understand formal organizations as systems of controlled and coordinated
activities, which arise in the embedding of work in compound networks of
technological links and border spanning exchanges. However, in the contemporary
societies, formal organizational arrangement occurs in exceedingly
institutional perspective. People manage the organizations and lead them to
integrate the procedures and practices characterized by prevailing restructured
notion of institutionalized and organizational work in the society.
Organizations, which do so, boost their survival prospects and legitimacy
autonomous of the instant effectiveness of the adopted procedures and
practices. There can be pressure formed between on one side the
institutionalized programs policies techniques services and products, which
purpose as myths, which one can adopt ceremonially while the other side there
can be, pressure of competence criteria.
To maintain ceremonial compliance, organizations,
which reveal organizational rules, have a tendency to bumper their formal
composition from reservations of technical actions by forming a loose combination
between the usual work activities and their formal composition. Rowan and Meyer
suppose that there should be a distinction formed between the usual daily
activities of an organization and its formal constitution. Both find formal
structure prevailing theories problematic because they suppose that the control
and coordination of action refer to the critical aspects that facilitate the
success of formal organizations in the contemporary world. They both think that
there should be an explanation given on the augmentation of the organizations,
which there is partly liberation from the conjecture that practically formal
structures control and coordinate work.
Rowan and Mayer count programs technology and
professions among others as the many compositions formal makeup, which act as
myths. The myths in formal organization make it essential and easier to form.
Given that people consider formal makeup necessary rational adequate and proper
to evade illegitimacy organizations should incorporate the formal structures.
Rowan and Mayer stress that phenomenon in the organizational surroundings
structure the organizations and are likely to become isomorphic with the
organizations. In one account of theorists who are badly prevailing exchange
and technical interdependencies results to the phenomenon in organizational
surroundings (March & Simon, 2004). In reference to the good account, the
organizational structure reveals socially created certainty in an extensive
sense, which the bad philosophers fail to capture.
Weber realized that the contemporary society requires
bureaucracy, which is a kind of formal organization. In accordance with Weber
(1978) bureaucracy is an efficient organizational structure. A formal
organization structure has the following characteristics a rewarded
administrative staff impersonal and formal communications, and record keeping
in an organization bureaucratic authority placed in different positions or
offices but not individuals a well-defined authority hierarchy which the people
in top position command the individuals in the bottom hierarchy. Written rules
and regulations that maximizes bureaucratic efficiency and operations.
Bureaucrats maintain their humanity even if a bureaucracy may be impersonal and
specialized (Weber, 1978). Inside any bureaucracy, informal relations
invariably form and increase the satisfaction of workers to a certain extent.
Informal groups may be disorderly to the bureaucracy effectiveness. A
bureaucracy only invents rules depending on its expectations. At times new extenuating
conditions or situations occur in a way that rules do not apply.
To realize the necessities and promote different
interests of people most organizations have surfaced in the contemporary
composite societies. There are two types of organizations- informal and formal
organizations. Formal organizations are the organizations in civilized
urbanized and industrialized contemporary societies. Because of the complexity
in the society growth, there has been a rise in the size and number of formal
organizations. These organizations exist in the industrial educational
political and economic fields. Formal organizations define the organizations
that are methodically worked-out and cautiously planned. Max Weber was the
first person to make a sociological scrutiny of formal organization. In his
work, Max Weber has given his notion of formal organization through bureaucracy
(Weber, 1978).
Weber’s management theory of bureaucracy concentrates
on grouping institutions into hierarchies by forming of control and authority.
Weber recommended organizations should form detailed and comprehensive standard
working dealings for all routine works. According to Max Weber Bureaucracy
surfaced from traditional organization structures for instance feudalism and
its increasing supremacy in the contemporary society (Weber, 1978). Weber
refers to formal organizations as secondary groups intended to accomplish the
set objectives. Bureaucracy is the dominant form of formal organizations. In
accordance with Weber, a bureaucracy contains labor division, hierarchy,
position replace-ability, impersonality communications, and written rules.
Society needs organization of bureaucracies and formal organizations to be able
to carry out its daily activities. People rely on the system to fulfill their
basic needs and for personal welfare.
Due to the rationality, formal organizations are
secondary categories intended to achieve the set objectives and are an
essential feature in the modern society. The larger a formal organization is
the higher the probability of becoming a bureaucracy. Five features
characterize bureaucracies as formal organizations- impartiality written
communication together with records written rules sharing of tasks clear tasks
having accountability taking upward flow and assignments taking a downward
flow. Bureaucracies can be dysfunctional even if they are an efficient
component in the social organization. Bureaucratic dysfunctions may include-
alienation poor communication among units red tape among others. Even though
formal organizations are of beneficial importance they have, a tendency of
letting self-perpetuating and small choice dominates them.
As said by Weber, a bureaucratic member is one that is
tied by the works in his or her ideological and economic existence (Weber, 1978).
Consequently, in bureaucracy the most stable aspect of human social life
producing specific behavior in an interconnected method through common
experience is an institution. Integrating organizations with value past the
technical needs in sight makes loyalty and commitment amongst organizational
members a key point to institutionalization. In Mayer and Rowan’s theory
people, live lives in their surroundings become aware of their lives in the
surroundings and depend on the lives they build in the surroundings.
Institutionalization refers to the way of involving individuals to commit in
the organization and simultaneously making the individuals the topic of
complete organizational control. Institutionalization depends on the personal
recognition with the ideas and core values of organization. The problem in
institutionalization is the way organizations integrate environmental
requirements and demands to survive and prosper.
A successful organization demonstrates its adjustment
to a number of institutionalized features in the environment because phenomena
largely structure it in the surrounding. As compared to “Bureaucracy” the
organizational adaptation in “Institutionalized organization” are ceremonial.
Rowan’s and Meyer’s theory maintains that individuals and organizations are
balanced in a network of beliefs rules norms and values. Long-term survival of
an organization increases as organization react to institutional rules and
state structures definition. Survival relies not only in meeting the ceremonial
needs of well-institutionalized surroundings and the boundary spanning links.
Myth conformity and efficiency can provide resources legitimacy and finally the
organizational survival. Rowan and Meyer structure organizations in a range of
technology and output control strength having the production certainty. Where
manufacturing organizations are unable to control output relational networks
management determines success. The bureaucratic theory cannot provide the
legitimacy of resources.
There is doubt if the technical bureaucracy
rationality strictly expressed as means and goals can suit all kinds of
organizations. Although it appears to apply to companies, which adopt the basic
reason of profit maximization and governmental activities, to an extent habitual
governmental works this rationality, becomes incompetent and harmful when in
application to government activities, which one cannot reduce to controls and
pure repetition. It is not possible to assign bureaucratic to hospitals schools
among other centers for community services. These centers rely on political
decisions and political needs and rational forecasts cannot determine them.
“Institutionalized organization” on the other hand can suit all kinds of
organizations (March & Simon, 2004). People tailor all the means and goals
of institutionalized organization in such a way that they apply to all the
organizations. The only concern of institutionalized organization is the core
values of the organization.
In conclusion as evidenced in the paper two factors,
contribute to formal organization growth- rational organizations tend to be an
effective way of structuring work, as economies become boundary spanning and
complicated. Because of the complexity in the society growth, there has been a
rise in the size and number of formal organizations. Weber’s management theory
of bureaucracy concentrates on grouping institutions into hierarchies by
forming of control and authority. Bureaucracy is the dominant form of formal
organizations. The larger a formal organization is the higher the probability
of becoming a bureaucracy. A successful organization demonstrates its
adjustment to a number of institutionalized features in the environment because
phenomena largely structure it in the surrounding.
References
March, J., & Simon, H. (2004). From organizations:
Cognitive limits on rationality. (pp. 532-518).
Princeton
Weber, M., (1978).Bureaucracy. Economy and Society, 2,
1003-956.
No comments:
Post a Comment