Transcript The Structure of Formal Organizations

The Structure of Formal
Organizations
Obj: Explain how bureaucracies
are structured; evaluate the
effectiveness of bureaucracies.
Sociologists use the term formal
organization to describe a large, complex
secondary group that has been
established to achieve specific goals.
Formal organizations include a variety of
groups such as schools, businesses,
government agencies, religious
organizations, labor unions, and
professional associations.
Most formal organizations are structured in a
form that is known as a bureaucracy. A
bureaucracy is a ranked authority structure
that operates according to specific rules
and procedures. Bureaucracies existed in
ancient times in Egypt, China, and Rome.
However, they rose to prominence during
the Industrial Revolution.
Industrialization was part of the process
called the rationalization of society.
Rationality involves subjecting every
feature of human behavior to calculation,
measurement, and control.
Bureaucracies were
created to rationally
organize groups to
complete a set of
goals. Today we use
the word bureaucracy
to refer to any
organization that has
many departments, or
bureaus. If you have
ever applied for a
driver’s license or been
admitted to a large
hospital, you have
dealt with a
bureaucracy.
Weber’s Model of Bureaucracies
The German sociologist Max Weber
developed a theoretical model of
bureaucracies that is still widely used by
sociologists today. According to Weber’s
model, bureaucracies have the following
characteristics:
• Division of labor Work is divided among
specialists in various positions. Each
specialist is expected to perform specific
duties.
• Ranking of authority There are clear-cut
lines of responsibility, and each individual
is responsible to a supervisor at a higher
level.
• Employment based on formal
qualifications Specific qualifications are
required for each job, and individuals are
hired on the basis of tests, education, or
previous experience. Also, in a
bureaucracy, the job - not the job-holder is important. Therefore, everyone is
replaceable.
• Rules and regulations There are objective
rules, regulations, and routine procedures
that identify the exact responsibilities and
authority of each person on the staff.
• Specific lines of promotion and
advancement It is assumed that
employees expect a career with the
organization. Thus, there are clear-cut
lines of premonition and advancement.
Among the rewards for remaining with the
organization are job security and seniority.
Remember that Weber’s model of
bureaucracy is an ideal type. In other
words, it describes the essential
characteristics of bureaucracies. The
structures of formal organizations conform
to the model to varying degrees. Many
governmental agencies and large
business corporations fit these
characteristics very rigidly. Other
organizations – such as voluntary
associations – may be much less
bureaucratic.
A voluntary association
is typically a nonprofit
organization formed to
pursue some common
interest. As the name
suggests, membership is
voluntary. Many officeholders and workers are
unpaid volunteers.
Examples of voluntary
association include
amateur sports teams,
professional
associations, service
clubs, charities, and
politics interest groups.
Relationships in Formal
Organizations
According to Weber’s model, bureaucracies
are formal impersonal structures.
However, informal structures based on
strong primary relationships may exist
within the most rigid bureaucracies. For
example, the director of sales in a large
corporation may play golf every weekend
with the director of purchasing. Or, they
may have gone to the same college and
now attend the same religious services.
The importance of primary group
relationships within formal organizations
was first noted in a research project at the
Hawthorne, Illinois, plant of the Western
Electric Company. The intended purpose
of the study, conducted between 1927 and
1932, was to determine how various
factors affected worker productivity.
As part of the research, the sociologists
studied the interaction between members
of a group of employees assigned the task
of wiring complex telephone circuits.
Three worker roles were involved – wirer,
solderer, and inspector. The wirers
connected the proper wires together. The
solderers then soldered them. The
inspectors examined the completed
circuits to make sure they met
specifications. The company paid workers
according to the number of circuits, or
units, they completed. Management
assumed that each worker would try to
complete as many units as possible in
order to make more money.
However, this was not the case. An informal
structure developed among the workers.
Together, they decided what the norms would
be for a day’s ratebusters. Those who produced
more were called ratebusters. Those who
produced less were called chiselers. Workers
who gave any information to a supervisor were
called squealers. Conformity to the norms was
enforced through a system of negative
sanctions, such as ridicule and exclusion. This
informal structure operated independently of the
formal structure of the organization and was far
more important to the individual workers.
How Effective Are Bureaucracies?
Some scholars have suggested that Weber’s
theoretical model views bureaucracies in a
positive light, as the best method of coordinating
large numbers of people to achieve large-scale
goals. Weber also suggested that bureaucracies
create order by clearly defining job tasks and
rewards. Further, they also provide stability,
since individuals come and go but the
organization continues. However, this view is a
rather broad overstatement of the effectiveness
of bureaucracies. In reality, they have several
important weaknesses.
One reason why actual bureaucracies are less
effective is that they lose sight of their original
goals. Sometimes, bureaucracies seem to
abandon their original purpose in favor of selfcontinuation. For example, certain government
agencies emphasize their need to exist,
regardless of whether or not they continue to
provide useful services. A study of the
Environmental Protection Agency provides a
striking illustration of this. The study found that
officials’ actions often favored survival of the
agency over enforcement of environmental
standards.
Sociologists have suggested that the
effectiveness of bureaucracies is
weakened because they tend to
encourage the development of a
bureaucratic personality. The formal
structure of a bureaucracy requires
officials to closely follow rules and
regulations. However, some officials focus
too intently on the rules and ignore the
goals of the bureaucracy. This often leads
to a related weakness-the proliferation of
“red tape,” or bureaucratic delay.
Individual officials play a limited as well.
This may cause people to
become entangled in red
tape. Consequently, they
spend hours filling out
forms, standing in
seemingly endless lines, or
being shuffled from one
department to another
before they accomplish
their goals. You probably
know stories or have had
experiences about how
frustrating it can be to deal
with the red tape of a
government agency or
large corporation.
Another weakness of bureaucracies involves
their tendency to result in oligarchies. An
oligarchy is a situation in which a few
people rule the many. In bureaucracies,
power tends to concentrate in the hands of
a few people at the top. These people then
use their position to promote their own
interests over the interests of the
organization. Sociologist Robert Michels
called this tendency of organizations to
become increasingly dominated by small
groups of people the iron law of
oligarchy.
Some critiques of bureaucratic effectiveness have
made their print through humor. In his book The
Peter Principle, Laurence J. Peter suggested
that employees in a bureaucracy often are
promoted to positions for which they may have
little ability. Bureaucracies are able to function,
he added, only because not all officials have
been promoted to their “level of incompetence.”
another humorous criticism of bureaucracies has
become known as Parkinson’s Law. C.
Northcote Parkinson argued that “work expands
to fill the time available for its completion.”
For example, assume that a
civil servant is overworked.
The person can solve the
problem in one of three
ways: (1) the person can
resign. (2) the person can
cut the work in half by
sharing it with a new
colleague. (3) the person
can demand the assistance
of two subordinates.
Parkinson’s Law says that
the individual will always
choose the third alternative.
The first alternative is unacceptable because
resigning will mean losing pension,
medical, and other benefits. The second
alternative is unacceptable because
people who gain a new colleague then
have a rival for promotion. If, however,
people have two subordinates, then their
job looks more important because they
have control over two individuals. There
must be two subordinates so that each is
kept in line by fear of the other person’s
promotion.
Eventually one of the subordinates will complain
about being overworked. Then that subordinate
will need two subordinates. Naturally, if one
subordinate gets two subordinates, the other
subordinate must have two subordinates. Our
civil servant soon has six subordinates. This
should ensure a promotion. But now our civil
servant is more overworked than ever before,
because all six of the subordinates are sending
work to be approved. The civil servant has to
work overtime to get all the work done but
concludes that late hours are a penalty of
success.