Achievement of Modern Bureaucracies - Essay Example

Bureaucracy is a term often used to describe rule-bound organizations where it is difficult to get any explanation or response because of red tape. If a process or person is referred to as being 'bureaucratic' it is generally intended to indicate that this is negative and unhelpful. In an extreme form bureaucratic organizations fail to do what they are supposed to because rules and regulations are applied so rigidly that employees lose sight of what their job is. Bureaucracy, as a sociological concept, was originally developed by Max Weber, one of the first sociologists to consider the role of individuals in relation to the structural determinants of social action. Much of his work was concerned with the notion of "rationality", which he used to explain the development of Western society which was increasingly based on science and calculation. Bureaucracy, combined with the growth of large organizations throughout the nineteenth century, led Weber to conclude that the decisive reason for the advance of bureaucratic organization was its purely technical superiority over any other form of organization. In short, it was a description of an ideal type of organization. Not ideal in the sense that it was perfect or one that should be aimed for, rather that its structure contained specific elements that characterized it as a bureaucracy and which were necessary to manage the organizations of the day. This occurs in part because public bureaucracies sometimes perceive themselves as guardians of the national interest: there is the idea that they embody ideals that transcend the policies of particular government: they can develop a character of their own and become set in their ways and difficult to change. In these circumstances professionals can be more concerned with their own survival than with the broader aims of providing for needs of the consumers of their service. This can be observed in the barriers that can exist between the different wards and departments and the lack of co-operation that ensues. The study of spatial separation is called proxemics; it involves the exploration of different practices and feelings about interpersonal space within and across cultures. In the United States, general practice allows intimate communications between close friends to occur at very short range. Conversations with acquaintances are often held at a 3-4 feet personal distance. Work-related discussions between colleagues may occur at a social distance of 4 to 12 feet with more impersonal and formal conversations in public occurring at even greater distances. Not only it is important to know and observe common practice with regard to the nature of the underlying relationships (intimate, friendly, work-related or casual) between two parties; it is also imperative that these practices be adapted for cultural differences. In some societies, sharply different practices prevail. For example, Latin America and Asian cultures generally favor closer distances for personal conversations; and workers in Arab countries often maintain extremely close contact. Therefore, sender should be aware of cultural norms and the receiver's preferences, and make an effort to understand and adapt to them. Bureaucratic Power Political conflict does not end after a law has been passed by Congress and signed by the president. The arena of conflict merely shifts from Capitol Hill and the White House to the bureaucracy - to the myriad departments, agencies, and bureaus of the federal executive branch that implement the law. Despite the popular impression that policy is decided by the president and Congress and merely implemented by the federal bureaucracy, in fact policy is also made by the bureaucracy. Indeed, it is often remarked that "implementation is the continuation of policy making by other means." The Washington bureaucracy is a major base of power in the American system of government - independent of Congress, the president, the courts, and the people. Indeed, controlling the bureaucracy has become a major challenge of democratic government. The Nature of Bureaucracy "Bureaucracy" has become a negative term equated with red tape, paper shuffling, duplication of effort, waste and inefficiency, impersonality, senseless regulations, and unresponsiveness to the need of "real" people. But bureaucracy is really a form of social organization found not only in governments but also in corporations, armies, schools, and many other societal institutions. The German sociologist Max Weber described bureaucracy as a "rational" way for society to organize itself that has the following characteristics: Chain of command: Hierarchical structure of authority in which command flows downward. Division of labor: Work divided among many specialized workers in an effort to improve productivity Specification of authority: Clear lines of responsibility with positions and units reporting to superiors. Goal orientation: Organizational goals determining structure, authority, and rules. Impersonality: All persons within the bureaucracy treated on "merit" principles, and all "clients" served by the bureaucracy treated equally according to rules; all activities undertaken according to rules; records maintained to assure rules are followed. Thus according to Weber's definition , General Motors and IBM, the U.S. Marine Corps, the U.S. Department of Education, and all other institutions organized according to these principles are "bureaucracies." The Growth of Bureaucratic Power Bureaucratic power has grown with advances in technology and increases in the size and complexity of society. The standard explanation for the growth of bureaucratic power in Washington is that Congress and the president do not have the time, energy, or expertise to handle the details of policy making. A related explanation is that the increasing complexity and sophistication of technology require technical experts ("technocrats") to actually carry out the intent of Congress and the president. Neither the president nor the 535 members of Congress can look after the myriad details involved in environmental protection, occupational safety, air traffic control, or thousands of other responsibilities of government. So the president and Congress create bureaucracies, appropriate money for them, and authorize them to draw up detailed rules, regulations, and "guidelines" that actually govern the nation. Bureaucratic agencies receive only vague and general directions from the president and Congress. Actual governance is in the hands of the Environmental Protection Agency, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, the Federal Aviation Administration, and hundreds of similar agencies. But there are also political explanations for the growth of bureaucratic power. Congress and the president often deliberately pass vague and ambiguous laws. These laws allow elected officials to show symbolically their concerns for environmental protection, occupational safety, and so on, yet avoid the controversies surrounding actual application of those lofty principles. Bureaucracies must then give practical meaning to these symbolic measures by developing specific rules and regulations. If the rules and regulations prove unpopular, Congress and the president can blame the bureaucrats and pretend that these unpopular decisions are a product of an "ungovernable" Washington bureaucracy. Finally, as the bureaucracy itself has grown in size and influence, it has become its own source of power. Bureaucracy have a personal stake in expanding the size of their own agencies and budgets and adding to their own regulatory authority. They can mobilize their "client" groups (interest groups that directly benefit from the agency's programs, such as environmental groups on behalf of the Environmental Protection Agency, farm groups for the Department of Agriculture, the National Education Association for the Department of Education) in support of larger budgets and expanded authority. Bureaucratic Power: Implementation Bureaucracies are not constitutionally empowered to decide policy questions. But they do so, nevertheless, as they perform their tasks of implementation, regulation, and adjudication. Implementation is the development of procedures and activities to carry our policies legislated by Congress. It may involve creating new agencies or bureaus or assigning new responsibilities to old agencies. It often requires bureaucracies to translate laws into operational rules and regulations and usually allocate resources - money, personnel, offices, supplies - to the new function. All of these tasks involve decisions by bureaucrats, decisions that drive how the law will actually affect society. In some cases, bureaucrats delay the development of regulations based on a new law, assign enforcement responsibility to existing offices with other higher priority tasks, and allocate few people with limited resources to the task. In other cases, bureaucrats act forcefully in making new regulations, insist on strict enforcement, assign responsibilities to newly created aggressive offices with no other assignments, and allocate a great deal of staff time and agency resources to the task. Interested groups have a strong stake in these decisions, and they actively seek to influence the bureaucracy. Bureaucratic Power: Regulation Regulation involves the development of formal rules for implementing legislation. The federal bureaucracy publishes about 60,000 pages of rules in the Federal Register each year. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is especially active in developing regulations governing the handling of virtually every substance in the air, water, or ground. The rule-making process for federal agencies is prescribed by an Administrative Procedures Act, first passed in 1946 and amended many times. Generally, agencies must: Announce in the Federal Register that a new regulations is being considered. Hold hearings to allow interested groups to present evidence and arguments regarding the proposed regulation. Conduct research on the proposed regulation's economic and environmental impacts. Solicit "public comments" (usually the arguments of interest groups) Consult with higher officials, including the Office of Management and Budget Publish the new regulation in the Federal Register. Regulatory battles are important because formal regulations that appear in the Federal Register have the effect of law. Congress can amend or repeal a regulation only by passing new legislation and obtaining the president's signature. Controversial bureaucratic regulations often remain in place because Congress is slow to act, because key committee members block corrective legislation, or because the president refuses to sign bills overturning the regulation. REFERENCES: H.H. Gerth and C. Wright Mills (trans. and ed.), From Max Weber (New York, 1946). Huber and Shipan. 2002. Deliberate discretion: The institutional foundations of bureaucratic autonomy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lowi. 1979. The end of liberalism. New York: W. W. Norton & Company. Max Weber, The Theory of Social and Economic Organization, tr. Henderson and Parsons (New York, 1947) Max Weber, Economy and Society, ed. G. Roth and C. Wittich (New York, 1968). David Beetham, Max Weber and the Theory of Modern Politics (London, 1974). Read More