Analysis of Webers Work - Book Report/Review Example

Analysis of Weber's Work Weber (1958) developed the concept of bureaucracy by studying power and ity and further discovered that several kinds can be identified. First, Weber described power based on the belief that rulers have natural rights to govern. This is often referred as the traditional power evident in kingdoms. Second, Weber outlined the capacity of individuals to have control over other. History has showed several instances of charismatic power in the likes of Hitler and Pope John Paul II (Baum, 1987). The final idea of Weber (1958) concentrated on legal and rational authority, which indicates that formally written rules held certain individuals to assume powerful positions. This power is commonly demonstrated by national and local leaders in several states. Using a combination of these ideas, Weber developed a concept for structuring that included rigid hierarchical structures, defined authority, set rules and regulations, and a specification of tasks in an impersonal climate. (Yosef and Almond, 1973) This resulted to work being divided into parts, allocated among the relatively specialised workers, dispersing the responsibilities, and centralising authority to a small number of administrators. Success has been observed among bureaucracies because these organisations stems from their ability to succeed at obtaining objectives and to work for big organisations. (Blau and Meyer, 1987) The structural attributes are maintained because of the reinforcing consequences achieved. Most important, bureaucracies maintain control despite the presence of uncertainties and the environment keeps on manifesting significant changes. (Beetham, 1974) Power Organisations According to Mintzberg (1979), organisations are divided into: the operating core, which includes employees who produces the goods and services of the organisation and directly participating as support to production; the strategic apex, which consists of the individuals in the top management including their personal staff; the middle line, which serve as the bridge that has authority over the operating core and reports to the strategic apex; the techno structure are the analysts that uses several technical tools to ensure that organisations perform with efficiency; and the support staff, which provides indirect support to the other parts of the organisation. In designing the organisation, several considerations have to be recognised. First, direct supervision is an important attribute that drives coordination through the proper relay of information and support in tasks. Authority is needed in organisations to ensure that policies are followed. Second, work and the subsequent processes have to be standardised. (Buchanan, 1985) Guidelines and frameworks have to be provided to the operation core to ensure that quality of products and services are maintained at higher levels. Third, outputs have to be generalised to determine the performance the different components of the organisation. (Mintzberg, 1979) The task includes setting of performance measures and conspicuous output determinant such as quotas. Fourth, skills are vital such that standardisation is imperative. (Mintzberg, 1979) Constant training among workers has to be manifested along with the creation of networks for knowledge sharing. Although most functions are standardised, organisations have to give room for creativity to grow. Innovation is considered as one the keys to survive the industry. (Mintzberg, 1979) Using the standards and rules, the employees can work and devise other approaches that will create better products. All parts of the organisation have to value the importance of creativity. Lastly, norms have to be regulated to create harmony in the workplace. Norms are also significant and affects the cultural backgrounds of different entities. Companies have to be founded on norms that are designed to improve the performance and to serve as the glue that will preserve the organisations. Based on the discussion, it is clear that Mintzberg's idea was fuelled by the effectiveness of bureaucracies and adhocracies. In creating organisations, it is imperative to check the basics. Logically, organisations have to be led and hierarchies also serve as motivational tools. (Beshears, 2006) Without the elements of politics, all entities can freely act according to the rules provided. The form of organisations suggested has to combine the advantages of convention and creativity. The use of effective approaches is advisable these methods with innovation will make the organisation highly efficient. Organisations have to be flexible yet the standard regulations have to be implemented. (Beshears, 2006) Successful organisations have learned to become creative amidst the rules that at times become major hindrances. The essence of forming organisations is realised once all components have effectively manifested their roles. As always, the results of such collaboration will be the testament that the kind of organisation formed will succeed. Theoretical Perspectives of Power The typology power of Max Weber (1958) is regarded as one of the most useful contributions in the corporate world. According to Weber (1958), power can either be sourced from coercion or authority. Coercive power is evident in prison cells as prisoners are forced to do chores under threat of punishment (Weber, 1997). Power from authority, however, has different kinds. Charismatic power is observed when individuals obey a leader with telling personal qualities. Moreover, traditional power is acquired because of inheritance and preservation. Finally, legal power is bourn from the position assumed by leaders. (Sican, 2004) From the concept of authority by Weber (1997), several interpretations on power came into existence. One of the most notable was the model of Etzioni. According to Etzioni, coercive power is a primary means of control existent is prisons (Azim and Boseman, 1974). Remunerative power is usually used in business organisations and normative power is present in universities and churches. Furthermore, the power requires involvement of the power holders in the organisation. Specifically the involvement are characterised as: alienative involvement, calculative involvement, and moral involvement. Coercive power has been mentioned in bilateral talks involving firms and individuals (De Dreu, 1995). It has been revealed that certain aspects drive firms to coerce their counterparts. Basically, coerciveness provides advantages as the use of such makes the other party more submissive. For instance, directors will instruct other members of the board to decide on their favour using coercion. As coercive practises are manifested, coercion power increases. Weber (1958) has been using charisma as basis for legitimacy and expanded on such idea. Accordingly, Weber (1958) highlighted the notion that authority is derived from exceptional sanctity, heroism, and exemplary character. Basically, individuals are easily drawn by leaders with charisma. In business organisations, charismatic leaders are also present in the boardroom (Conger and Kanungo, 1987). In truth, some non-executive directors are admired because of their ability to influence decisions and promote positive outcomes. It is logical to expand the role of charismatic non-executive directors as it will dictate the direction of organisation and eventually towards success. (Conger and Kanungo, 1987) Traditional power is also coined from the works of Weber (1958) and has been noticeably used in several organisations. In some corporations, for instance, traditional leaders have been ruling the boardroom for decades (Hansen, 1966). In the corporate world, traditional power is often attributed to the background of leaders. Most leaders have become powerful because of their lineage and relationship with previous leaders. The process continuous until an outside individual assumes the leadership. This leadership is transferred through the bloodline and relinquished after the death of the leader. (Hansen, 1966) According to Weber (1997), bureaucracy is an outcome that can be derived from legal-rational order. Legal basis is essential especially for non-executive director to expand their roles and improve their efficiency. Corporations moulded out of reason necessitate the conception of ideas such as the Higgs review to arrive at better decision-making. (Constas, 1957) Other Related Works An interesting work by Anthony Sampson (1975) in The Seven Sisters: The Great Oil Companies and the World They Shaped details the difference in leadership among big oil companies. Accordingly, Exxon executives are more oriented in business and deviates from politics. (Wilkins, 1976) Shell executives, however, are well-educated and focuses on diplomacy than profits. Sampson (1975) mentioned that firms in the same industry use contrasting approaches. It is obvious that leaders of Exxon are purely traditional and Shell executives exude charismatic power. The work clearly illustrates that power in firms is approached differently. Leaders in the oil companies have risen to power because of varied reasons and objectives. (Wilkins, 1976) Another breakthrough in Sampson (1977) work is The Arms Bazaar that discussed the power in Lockheed. In this investigative initiative, Sampson (1977) was able to reflect an important essence of coercive power. Indeed, bribery is linked with coercion only is a manner that is approached differently. As described previously, power through coercion allows leaders to emphasise on punishment. Bribery although provides great rewards has an underlining punishment. Once a party resists the offer of the briber, then it is likely that the leaders will use all necessary means to punish the company tat failed to accept the deal. (Freedman, 1978) In political struggles within firms, it is important to have leaders. Britain has witnessed several leaders each having their strengths and weaknesses. The corporate structure of U.K. is unique and provides enough rights to all entities. The majority in U.K. is the most powerful. Although the minority is given enough representation, their lack in numbers affects their ability to influence decisions. Some minority leaders, however, are charismatic and are capable of getting favours from the majority. On the other hand, minority group that fail to convince the majority will have to use other means even if the measure requires unconventional proceedings. (Legum, 1956) Shifts in U.K. have marked successive changes that created a different perspective to U.K. society. Rasmussen (1984) stated that Britain's institution and leaders have stepped through the challenges in reviving and modernising the nation. Basically, U.K was shaped by the institutions and leaders that lorded over the nation for centuries. Instructions have bee vital source of necessities and leaders have existed to guide individuals towards their goals. Gradually, U.K. has slowly reacted to the changes in the global scene and the leaders specifically have realised the need to act with power. Charismatic leaders have started from struggles and became prominent individuals after winning their respective wars. Cochrane (1969) noticed that heroism is still a major indicator of success in U.K. In the corporate world, leaders who have made firms rise from the ashes are heroes. Directors who formulated effective strategies are expected to obtain the admiration of stakeholders and become a boundless leader. Several companies have become household names because their leaders have been influencing both the organisations and the market. This trend is will continue to flourish despite the existence of traditional leaders. Cochrane (1969) Coalition Theory Coalitions arise from different circumstances. Basically, the logical reason to form coalition is to gain more power. In The Theory of Coalitions, Riker (1962) contends that only a subset of the minimal winning coalitions will materialise. The theory presupposes that coalitions are formed when decisions have to be made involving two parties. Part of the condition is that no single option will maximise the returns for both parties. Moreover, dictatorial powers are removed from either party. Also, the veto power that parties have will be deprived to make a balance playing field. Another way to reduce the minimal winning prediction-set was proposed by Leiserson (1968). In the theory called "the bargaining proposition." It was explained that individuals have to expect the minimal winning coalition with the smallest number of actors to form. This theory is based on the assumption that the smaller the number of parties, the easier it is to agree when bargaining, and the easier it is to form a coalition. Increasing the number of coalition will lead to complications. In addition, contrasting ideas will make bargaining hard to undertake and decided. Axelrod (1970) introduced the concept ideological connection as part of the entire process of coalition. Applying in the corporate world, firms with the same ideologies are likely to firm coalitions than firms without established connections. Noticeably, companies that form coalition become more powerful especially in dictating the direction of the market. The power gained by the firms have catapulted their status as prime contributors in the industry, Gamson (1961) stressed that firms form coalition because it is expected that the returns will be equal among parties concerned. In this theory, the concept of equity and parity are present. Maximising the gains for the coalition also increases the proportion of the company from the collective gains. In this situation, contribution is a key consideration. In the boardroom for instance, directors form coalitions to increase their number when voting. Gamson (1961) This strategy has been effective in controlling the decision-making and the power is preserved among members of the coalition. Shapley and Shubik (1954) specifically state the different approach in dividing the gains of coalitions. Power is an important measuring stick and often used as basis for allocation of benefits. In a coalition, it is expected that some members will have less power than the others. This is measured by the ability of the coalition to maintain its robustness once a member withdraws. Members are powerful once their withdrawal will significantly affect the coalition. Because of this privilege, the members with distinct power advantage grab most of the gains compared with the low-key members. Finally, the bargaining takes a different approach in the manner of dividing gains of coalition. In truth, the two previous approaches are problematic. Members with high power will decline to adopt divide the gains equally. In the manner, members with low contributions will have to convince the others to provide equal shares. In this situation both parties will bargain and arrive at a distribution scheme that pictures a win-win situation. (Schelling, 1960) This has been commonly practised in current corporate environments. References Axelrod, R. (1970). Conflict of Interest. Chicago, IL: Markham Publishing Company. Azim, A. and Boseman, F.G. (1974). "An empirical assessment of Etzioni's topology of power and involvement within a university setting." Baum, H. (1987). Invisible Bureaucracy. London: Oxford University Press. Beetham, D. Max Weber and the Theory of Modern Politics. New York: Free Press. Beshears, F. (2006). "Mintzberg's taxonomy of organizational forms." California: University of California - Berkley Blau, P. and Meyer, M. (1987). Bureaucracy in the Modern History. New York: Random House. Buchanan, D. (1985).Organizational Behaviour. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall International. Cochrane, J. (1963).The International and Comparative Law Quarterly. "The New Europeans." Conger, J. and Kanungo, R. (1987). Academy of Management Review. "Toward a behavioural theory of charismatic leadership in organizational settings. Constas, H. (1957). The American Journal of Psychology. "Max Weber's two conceptions of bureaucracy." De Dreu, C. (1995).Journal of Conflict Resolution. "Coercive power and concession making in bilateral negotiation." Freedman, L. (1978). International Affairs. "The arms bazaar: The companies, the dealers, the bribes." Gamson, W. A. (1961). American Sociological Review. "An experimental test of a theory of coalition formation." Hansen, N. (1966). The Quarterly Journal of Economics. "Schumpeter and Max Weber: Comment." Legum, C. International Affairs. "The treason cage: The opposition on trial in South Africa." Leiserson, M. (1968). American Political Science Review. "Factions and coalitions in one-party Japan: An interpretation based on the Theory of Games. Mintzberg, H. (1979). The Structuring of Organizations. New Jersey: Prentice- Hall. Rasmussen, J. (1984). Political Science Quarterly. "The changing anatomy of Britain." Riker, W. The Theory of Political Coalitions. London, United Kingdom: Yale University Press. Sampson, A. (1975). The Seven Sisters: The Great Oil Companies and the World they Shaped. London: Bantam Books. Sampson, A. (1977). The Arms Bazaar. London: Bantam Books. Schelling, T. (1953). The Strategy of Conflict. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Shapley, L. and Shubik, M. (1954). American Political Science Review." Method for evaluating and distribution of power in a committee system." Sican, A. (2004). Max Weber and the New Century. London: Transaction Publishers. Weber. M. (1958). The Three Types of Legitimate Rule. New, York: Free Press. Weber, M. (1997). The of Social and Economic Organizations. New York: Free Press. Wilkins, M. (1976). The Journal of Economic History. The seven sisters: The great oil companies and the world they shaped." Yosef, R. and Almond, G. (1973). Bureaucracy and the Public. New York: Basic Books, Inc. Read More