Views of various theorists on Weberian Bureaucracy

Robert Merton

Bureaucracy is not the only form of legal authority- Weber has used the term ‘bureaucracy’ and ‘legal’, both strictly as well as loosely. According to Weber, the legal rational administrative system is the bureaucracy. But, in his writings, Weber has also used the term bureaucracy loosely by referring to patrimonial administrative system as patrimonial bureaucracy or feudal administrative system as feudal bureaucracy. The term ‘legal’ has been used to denote the rational authority. But, while referring to the types of legitimacy, the term ‘legal’ was used in a loose sense.

R.K. Merton- He is a social anthropologist. In his study on deviance, he considered a number of social phenomenon and organizations. He also considered bureaucracy as a social organization and conducted an empirical study and based on that empirical study, he emphasized that bureaucracy has rule or means orientation, thereby, for bureaucrats, the rules and regulations are the goal in itself. In actual practice, the organizational goal is surrendered or sacrificed. For the individuals within the bureaucracy, there is a case of goal displacement resulting into dysfunctionality. He calls bureaucracy as ‘ritualistic’ because the means is adhered to and the goal is lost.  

Alvin Gouldner- He also did an empirical study of bureaucracy. Based on this study, he referred to bureaucracy as a ‘punishment centred’ bureaucracy because for the bureaucracy to be effective, the individual functionaries are required to perform and within bureaucracy, in order to ensure the performance of the individuals, rules and regulations are put in place. The goal is to routinize the work and enhance the performance. In actual practice, the functionaries bring in the counter-measures or the counter-control mechanisms. He also found that the natural tendency of the individuals is to escape the responsibilities by bringing counter-measures and only attain a minimum acceptable level of performance. This leads to an organization where there is a jungle or rules and regulations. In such an organization, the individuals prefer inaction to action. He says that the Weberian Model of Bureaucracy is dysfunctional.

Phillip Shelznick- He also did an empirical study. He found out that bureaucrats are naturally aberrant towards decentralization. But, when the organization grows in size and operation, decentralization becomes a reality out of compulsion. In actual functioning, the various units and sub-units develop their own sub-goals and in many of the cases, the sub-goals are not consistent with the organizational goal. The individual functionaries develop their loyalty towards the sub-goal rather than the organizational goal rendering the bureaucracy ineffective.

Raymond Hall and J.J. Peters- They are known for a law which is known as Peter Principle. According to this, within the bureaucracy, individuals rise to their level of incompetence. It is emphasized that within bureaucracy, the promotion is based on performance in the existing position. So, the individual keeps on rising in the organizational hierarchy so long as the individual keeps on performing. Finally, the individuals cease themselves in a position where they are not performing because had they been performing, they would have been promoted to the next higher level. These theorists are trying to highlight that the individuals who are performing in a current position might not necessarily be a performing functionary in a future position. Thus, the promotion to a particular should not only be based on the current performance of the individual but also on the expected performance in the future position of that particular individual.

C. Northcote Parkinson- He came out with the ‘Parkinson’s Law’. This principle is also known as law of Rising Pyramid. He undertook an empirical study of the British office responsible for the Colonial Administration during 1936-1950. The importance of this particular office was decreasing during this period as it was the phase of decolonization. But, the size and activities of this office was increasing. While taking this into consideration, Parkinson finally concluded that in bureaucracy, the work expands depending upon the time available for the completion of the job. He found out that bureaucracy carries an inherent tendency towards empire building. Thereby, it exaggerates its significance and complexity of work while pretending to operate in an environment of secrecy. Because of this tendency, the bureaucracy tends to adds personnel and add hierarchy, thereby, increasing the size of the organization irrespective of the size of the job. This can help in explaining the problem of down-sizing.

Riggs, Crozier, Braibanti etc. - They conducted empirical studies in non-western systems and have criticized Weberian bureaucracy as being non-ecological and non-universalistic. They found out that the administration might be Weberian by structure but have been non-Weberian in function and behaviour.