Principal Characteristics of the Weberian Ideal Type Bureaucracy - Research Paper Example

Max Weber (1864 – 1920) is one of the leading German intellectuals of the 20th century, having written influential treatises on Sociology, Capitalismand Religion, and Bureaucracies as they represented the rational rule of society. When looking for the philosophical influences that influenced Weber’s theories, it is difficult to find as Weber critiqued in many ways Socialism in his writings but maintained an academic distance from other schools of thought. While Weber may be most influenced by the German philosophers Immanuel Kant and Friedrich Nietzsche as they dominated German philosophy in his day, he is not writing to them directly or with frequent reference in his work, and his teachings stand independent. What is amazing about Max Weber is the influence that he had on academic Sociology in the historical context, for much of what we know of that discipline is generated from his methods and writings on the topic at the turn of the 20th century. Weber’s ideas on bureaucracy also lead to the formation of extensive government service enterprise being formed and operated on his philosophy’s foundation. In retrospect, Weber seems to have more similarities within his discipline with researchers such as Émile Durkheim and Frederick Winslow Taylor, writing on issues such as the scientific efficiency in bureaucracies, than with traditional schools of continental philosophy contemporaneous with him. Bureaucracy, as it is known in the practice of modernity, was largely created on the philosophical basis outlined by Max Weber in his works. As Weber’s corpus of writing is large and frequently focused on other topics, his writing on Bureaucracy is largely found in three of his main published works. Economies of Antiquity - 1908 The Theory of Social and Economic Organisation - 1920 Economy and Society (Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft) - 1922 In his research, Weber analyzed the economic relationships of ancient societies and compared them to modernity. In looking at how societies were organized politically, Weber identifies three main types of political societies as fundamental in The Theory of Social and Economic Organisation. As the Economist writes: “Weber described three types of leadership: the charismatic, the hereditary and the bureaucratic. Each of these, he claimed, can generate obedience, but each is suitable for a different stage in an organisation’s development. The charismatic leader suits an organisation in its early days, when it relies on the vision of a single person to push it towards its goal. The hereditary leader, who comes with authority that has been vested elsewhere (either because his father was chairman before him, or because of success in another organisation), is suitable for an organisation whose rules and precedents are well established. In the third bureaucratic stage, everything runs with machine-like efficiency, and authority and control are exercised on the basis of knowledge. The military is one example of an organisation in this stage.” (Economist, 2009) In this manner, Bureaucracy as posited by Weber became an ideal type of society, one that was managed and ordered on the principles of rationalism. In the societies characterized by a charismatic leader, the social structure is more akin to authoritarianism or totalitarianism. The rule by decree follows ego, and in such it may be also filled with bias and self-interest, leading Weber to conclude that this was not the best form for an ideal society based on utilitarian principles, or the good of the many outweighing the benefit of the few. In fact, in charismatic leadership societies, the interests of the few were more apt to dominate the needs of the many. On this basis, Weber warned of the charismatic and its influence in politics presciently, for Hitler was to begin his rise to power from the Ashes of the Weimar Republic Weber helped to form within only a few years of Weber’s death. In the Charismatic leader and the type of society organized under its rule, Weber believed one would be more likely to see bias and illegitimate authority passed from generation to generation through the hereditary transference of wealth and power. Where land or property ownership was concentrated of one class, authority might wield that power in an arbitrary or authoritarian manner in order to maximize the benefit of a minority group in society. Thus the charismatic and the hereditary both represented a threat to the establishment and growth of progressive democratic principles in a society. Where Weber studied Marx in order to critique the theories of communism and socialism with a progressive view of democracy in capitalism, he still required a means of authority and administration in society that would reflect his ideal. He saw in bureaucracy the ideal social from of rational administration that he was searching for in rational governance. Therefore, it is important to view Weber as both an exemplar of rationalism and idealism in his philosophy and writings. Weber appears as a rationalist because he favors a subjective inquiry into the issues of history and culture that is approached through the facilities of the mind and reason. While Weber does employ statistical methodology and empiricism, he is much more expressing the proclivity for a philosophy of the State based on reason, openness, and co-operation than that ruled by authoritative dictate or decree. The development of progress required both the ideal and rationality, in the way that reason creates the ideal, and thus Weber can also be associated with a unique type of pre-WWII German progressivism that was to be highly influential all over the world in developing the sociological approach. “Bureaucracy is the division of labour applied to administration Bureau, is a French word meaning desk, or by extension, an office; thus, Bureaucracy is rule through a desk or office, that is, a form of organization built on the preparation and dispatch of written documents. In contrast to the commonly held view of bureaucracies, they do not rule in their own right but are the means by which a monarchy, aristocracy, democracy, or other form of authority, rules.” (MIS, 2010) In this instance it is clear, in that imagining an ideal society ruled by reason, the desk or office would become a symbol of modernity and the new administration. This was fundamentally democratic, and Weber tried to implement these principles in founding a democracy, in the example if the Weimar Republic. This is important in that Weber explicitly rejected authoritarianism and totalitarianism in a time when it was dangerously perilous to German civil society. In doing so, he laid down the principles for a continental bureaucracy that is still existent and evolving around the world to this day. “MODERN officialdom functions in the following specific manner: I. There is the principle of fixed and official jurisdictional areas, which are generally ordered by rules, that is, by laws or administrative regulations. 1. The regular activities required for the purposes of the bureaucratically governed structure are distributed in a fixed way as official duties. 2. The authority to give the commands required for the discharge of these duties is distributed in a stable way and is strictly delimited by rules concerning the coercive means, physical, sacerdotal, or otherwise, which may be placed at the disposal of officials. 3. Methodical provision is made for the regular and continuous fulfilment of these duties and for the execution of the corresponding rights; only persons who have the generally regulated qualifications to serve are employed. In public and lawful government these three elements constitute bureaucratic authority. In private economic domination, they constitute bureaucratic management. Bureaucracy, thus understood, is fully developed in political and ecclesiastical communities only in the modern state, and, in the private economy, only in the most advanced institutions of capitalism.” (Weber, Wirtschaft, pp. 650-78) From Max Weber, Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, part III, chap. 6 - VIII. Bureaucracy In this quote from Economy and Society (Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft) (1922), Weber gives his most complete outline of the characteristics of bureaucracy. In the first instance, bureaucracy is “an official duty” and with this comes the idea of service to the ideals of progress and reason, as well as to democracy. In that this is a civil position, it is the essence of authority, but the administration from desk is also a career and a profession, with its own logic of governance that can be implemented to create social change. If one considers the degree to which progressive idealism can model a future society, in mind, theory, or text, it becomes clear that their must also be a means and a method to implement the vision. Thus Weber creates the ideal of bureaucracy as a critique of socialism but also as a means through which progressive democracy and scientific progress could implement a transformative vision to the wider society at large. That this task and goal of bureaucracy involved the organization of the resources of the State that were also considered the heritage or resources of the community of individuals, the use of progressive means and models to organize society was required by Weber. The bureaucracy functioned in this way but was removed from the passions of the day by being anchored in a career professionalism and a higher logic of the ideals on behalf of the bureaucrat. Thus, this model involves a level of trust of society to the bureaucrat that corruption not develop within the system of bureaucracy and give birth to the same forms of bias and inequality that are shown in the charismatic and hereditary forms of society. Yet Weber does not develop sufficient anti-corruption methods for bureaucracy, namely as he is focused on building the ideals to which the bureaucrat might aspire to in his or her career path. One check against the unguarded power of a bureaucracy is that Weber writes that the bureaucracy should not be coercive, physically violent, or oppressive to the individual, but he does not follow through with the means through which this is achieved. His main appeal and ideal in this regard is that the bureaucrat is self-governed by a sense of “duty”. Thus, idealism and rationalism play a huge role in Weber’s thought, to the extent that he believes all bureaucrats can be governed by this same appeal to duty. However, in modern States where the bureaucracies have grown in size to encompass millions of employees, and the amount of resources managed by their administration is valued in the millions or trillions of dollars in property and capital, then not only is the demographic base for institutional corruption founded in Weber’s ideal bureaucracy, but it is also engrained through the career path which guarantees that this corruption will stay in the system for a long time. Perhaps because of the dangers inherent in his own system of bureaucratic idealism, Weber believed that it could only be practiced in the context of the most progressive modern State. It appears that an evolved sense of duty he felt was also inherent to the citizenry of advanced capitalism, but it is not fully evident or proven why this should be nor is it seen in the evidence given in modern capitalist societies. Thus, in basing his system of bureaucracy on the “duty” and sense of idealism of the bureaucrat, Weber created a system that would be designed to fail if corruption, self-seeking behavior, deception, hypocrisy, and cynicism entered the system at a fundamental level. As the bureaucracy administers through paper, the amount of paperwork in modern capitalist bureaucracies would grow as a means to mask corruption and limit transparency in institutions, rather than promoting it. Weber lists six types of bureaucratic structure (TSR, 2010): The Judiciary The Modern Agency The Military Religious communities - required to administer believers States - that control policy and policing Economies - that distribute goods and coordinate functions On this basis, Weber advanced the bureaucracy to control all of society, with profound consequences for modernism that have fundamentally shaped our organization. Weber uses the principles of specialization that would be so characteristic of careerism and professionalism in modernity to create a bureaucratic specialization that can control society over large stretches of time. In the judiciary, the bureaucracy is specialized in the interpretation of law. In the military, bureaucrats make a science of the application of violent force for control. The modern agency is a micro-pattern of the State bureaucracy as a macro-example. In the economy, this can also be expressed in bureaucracies of production and distribution following Marx. While Weber inherently believed in the superiority of democracy and capitalism, this was to become the fundamental structure of the modern, democratic State as it opposed Socialism in definition of order and application of authority in society Bureaucracy thus crates a social structure characterized by four fundamentals in practice (University of Chicago, 2010) 1) office holders personally free and subject to authority only within the scope of their impersonal official obligations 2) hierarchy of offices 3) sphere of competence 4) free selection into office; filled by free contractual relationship; always free to resign 5) candidates appointed, not elected, on basis of technical qualifications 6) remuneration is by fixed salaries of $$ 7) office is sole or primary occupation of incumbent 8) constitutes a career; system of promotion 9) official cant own means or appropriate position 10) official subject to strict and systematic discipline and control in conduct of office. In discussing the strengths and weaknesses of this system, it has been noted how corruption can become endemic just as in the charismatic and hereditary models of society, because of the manner in which authority is preserved and transmitted through career and profession. If the bureaucrat fails to preserve his or her sense of duty, the system can fail by allowing corruption to rule society. This has been shown not only in Weber’s own time by Kafka’s writings, but also in modern representations of popular literature and culture such as Orwell’s 1984 and Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451. While this model is efficient in the management of the modern State through the practice of specialization in industry, it leads to a system of large government and continual taxes that many feel is incompatible with democracy. Just as totalitarian and authoritarian systems have their bias and hegemony, so may a ruling class dominate minorities in a culture through majority rule and bureaucracy. Weber does not provide a sufficient system of check and balances to guard against these risks inherent in his bureaucratic ideal In the manner posited by Weber, bureaucracy is the most efficient expression of societal organization that can be constructed in an advanced capitalist system. Again, it is important to remember that Weber not only believed that bureaucracy was the ideal administrative use of authority in modern capitalism, but also that it could not be found in conditions other than the modern capitalist society. In his view, the ideals of rationalism and progress needed to be sufficiently developed in the society in order to create the sense of duty in the bureaucrat through which professional standards of conduct would be maintained. Indeed, Weber saw the bureaucrat allied not with his manager or superiors, who could be replaced in the system for non-performance as easily as the peon, but he saw them all allied to an ideal of progress that would fuel both personal and societal growth through professionalism. Thus, Weber creates separate structures for business and governance that rest on shared principles in democracy and capitalism. “The official works in a detached fashion from the ownership of the organization. The finances and interests of the two should be kept firmly apart: the resources of the organization are quite distinct from those of the members as private individuals. Officials may appropriate neither posts nor the resources which go with them. A radical notion at a time when bribery was the norm and officials regularly took a cut of any fee or payment due to their office.” (HRM, 2010) Nevertheless, the level of finances governed by the modern State makes corruption a greater risk, and the size of the modern State in the number of employees maintained as part of the bureaucracy make the appearance of corruption, even in a minority of examples where bureaucrats fail in doing their duty, more certain. For statistical methods will allow for a percentage of corruption in any system. Thus, a better system of check and balances to secure societal interests against corruption is required in modern democracies. Weber writes, “Once it is fully established, bureaucracy is among those social structures which are the hardest to destroy. Bureaucracy is the means of carrying community action over into rationally ordered societal action. Therefore, as an instrument for societalizing relations of power, bureaucracy has been and is a power instrument of the first order-for the one who controls the bureaucratic apparatus.” (Weber, 1922) This aspect of bureaucracy has been the hardest for modern society to reform. One established, it is difficult to diminish bureaucratic structures. As bureaucrats are funded by the public budget, they are funded by the wider majority through taxation. As a minority interest entrenched in society in a manner similar to the hereditary, in that their jobs continue perpetually on a career path and pension, bureaucracy can become a major financial burden for States. This relation has been analyzed critically through Austrian schools of Economics who advocate for a limited State as an a priori of freedom. The creation of an excessive bureaucracy that cannot be abolished or destroyed can lead to a situation where liberty and freedom decrease in a society due to the effects of bureaucracy in the private sector. When compared to the type of liberalism, for example, discussed by Adam Smith in The Wealth of Nations, we see bureaucracy as overly intrusive on business interests by nature, forcing fundamental problems into capitalism despite Weber’s intention to streamline it through efficiency. Thus, sufficient problems may aris from the perpetuation of large Weberian bureaucracies in a modern State, and his theory of an ideal bureaucracy does not include a sufficient series of check and balances to guard against it. Sources: University of Chicago 2010, MAX WEBER: Basic Terms (The Fundamental Concepts of Sociology), Sociaological Theory. Last accessed Dec. 13th, 2010, Available at: http://ssr1.uchicago.edu//PRELIMS/Theory/weber.html#WEBER6 TSR 2010, Webers Study of Bureaucracy, The Student Room. Last accessed Dec. 13th, 2010, Available at: http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/wiki/Revision:Webers_Study_of_Bureaucracy Kimble, Chris 2010, Webers Study of Bureaucracy, MIS. Last accessed Dec. 13th, 2010, Available at: http://www.chris-kimble.com/Courses/mis/Bureaucratic_Organisations.html Robson, JD 2010, Max Weber’s Ideal Type’, UALR. Last accessed Dec. 13th, 2010, Available at: http://www.ualr.edu/jdrobson/idealtype.htm Weber, Max 1922, The theory of social and economic organization. Last accessed Dec. 13th, 2010, Available at: http://books.google.co.in/books?id=-WaBpsJxaOkC Weber, Max 1920, Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, part III, chap. 6, pp. 650-78. Last accessed Dec. 13th, 2010, Available at: http://www.faculty.rsu.edu/~felwell/TheoryWeb/readings/WeberBurform.html Guru 2009, Max Weber, The Economist. Last accessed Dec. 13th, 2010, Available at: http://www.economist.com/node/12762398 HRM Guide 2010, Classical organization theory, Human Resource Management. Last accessed Dec. 13th, 2010, Available at: http://www.hrmguide.co.uk/history/classical_organization_theory.htm H. H. Gerth, Hans Heinrich Gerth, Bryan S. Turner 1991, From Max Weber: essays in sociology By Max Weber, Oxford: Routledge Press, 1991. Accessed Dec. 13th, 2010, Available at: http://books.google.co.in/books?id=Y_pqZS5q72UC Max Weber (1909-1920), ‘Characteristics of Bureaucracy’, The Bureaucratic Machine. Last accessed Dec. 13th, 2010, Available at: http://spot.colorado.edu/~wehr/301R4.TXT Read More