Bureaucracy

Definition and Characteristics

The illustrious German sociologist Max Weber noted several characteristics of the bureaucratic form of organization that defined it as an ideal type.

First, bureaucracy derives its authority through law. It depends neither on traditional nor on personal modes of authority. It is instead based on a form of legal-rational authority that defines the foundations of the organization's jurisdiction and its procedures of operation.

Second, bureaucracy has differentiated offices or units that have specialized competencies and jurisdictions. This aspect of bureaucracy provides it with some obvious advantages, including the ability to bring technical expertise and experience to bear on particular aspects of problems. It also raises some difficulties, however, in coordination of tasks, and it sometimes creates conflicting perspectives as to what the task is or how a problem should be defined.

Third, bureaucracy is characterized by an internally hierarchical system of authority required to bring its distinctive parts together as part of a unified system of coordination. The extent to which this hierarchical control system can actually be put in place is almost always imperfect, though the extent to which it can be consummated rests on many factors other than coercion. These include leadership that obtains support from all of the organization's distinctive offices and units, clarity of purpose from organizational leadership, and careful assessments of feasible paths to ends.

Fourth, bureaucracy is also characterized by rules and procedures that govern its internal functions. It has a memory and a set of procedures for dealing with recurring matters. Weber referred to this as the organization's “files,” and this storage of experience and written rules anchors bureaucracy in the legal-rational system of authority. The files provide precedents and also produce standard operating procedures (SOPs) that enable bureaucracies to become more proficient in responding to [Page 167]problems that can be readily identified and are within the organizational repertoire. The more ambiguous or multifaceted the problem, however, the more complicated will be the sorting process within a bureaucratic organization and the more likely, therefore, that problems are recognized and defined in ways reflecting the complex differentiation of bureaucratic organizations. This means that there are likely to be many different perspectives rather than a unified one.

Fifth, bureaucracy is typically characterized by a full-time corps of officials. In governments, these officials are known as civil servants; they represent the continuity of the organizations of government, their missions and functions, and the antecedent ongoing commitments of government. Similarly, in private enterprise and even in nonprofit organizations (nongovernmental organizations), full-time managers and subordinates provide the basic maintenance functions within an organization, negotiate its external environment, and organize its production and marketing functions.

Realities are often more complex than this ideal-type description of bureaucracy. Sometimes bureaucratic forms exist but without the reputed benefits of expertise and efficient allocations of attention. Bureaucratic pathologies may run deep reflecting both environmental and cultural influences, shortages of resources, and incentives for suboptimal performance. These pathologies are especially notable in less developed countries. Consequently, to understand the topic better, this entry addresses the following questions: Why do we have bureaucracy? What are the relationships with capitalism and market? What is the bureaucratic state and what are its relationships with democracy? What are the internal and external pathologies of bureaucratic behavior?

...