Critical Analysis Of Max Weber's Theory Of Bureaucracy

Throughout the rigmarole of political history of the United States of America, the growth of the “fourth branch of government”, the Bureaucracy, has been a prominent, controversial topic. Peter Woll, in his article “Constitutional Democracy and Bureaucratic Power”, and James Q. Wilson, in his article “The Rise of the Bureaucratic State”, discuss this developing administrative branch. The Constitution has no written mention of an “administrative branch”, and today’s Bureaucracy is often tedious, corrupt, and even undemocratic. But such a branch’s development and expansion is necessary in order to keep par with an evolving and changing society.

Max Weber was a German sociologist who first described the concept of bureaucracy, an ideal form of organizational structure. He defines bureaucratic administration as the exercise of control on the

The purpose of this essay is to analyse Weber’s theory of authority and power in order to establish its role in the modern contemporary world today. Weber, in his most acclaimed writings, discusses his three ideal types of authority being outlined as traditional, charismatic and rational-legal authority. He believes that in order for any political leader or political establishment to hold legitimate authority over its peoples, they must have either one of these types of authority. All of these types of power and authority can be referred to in some way in today’s contemporary world using examples of differing political leaders and systems. However, Weber’s writings were conducted in 1922 and may be considered as out-dated, and not as relevant as they were at his time of writing. Also, many dispute that Weber’s types of authority were perhaps not entirely relatable and Martin Spencer, like many other critics of Weber’s work in fact argue that there should have been four types of authority. Hence why these issues must be discussed in order to conclude whether Weber’s ideal types of authority are representative of political leaders and governments, and whether or not they can be associated with the contemporary world we live in today.

Elisabetta Gualmini states in that in Weberian bureaucracies there are careers that require “legal training, are on a seniority and hierarchal system, and people are forced to comply to strict rules” (76). Similarly, Meier, Polinard and Wrinkle state that bureaucracies try “to institutionalize its demands on the school system by establishing rules” (591). Regulation on schools depends on basic bureaucratic rules according to Christian Maroy (72). Meier, Polinard and Wrinkle continue by saying that schools “[design] procedures that permit monitoring, and [restrict] discretion in the school system. Thus, democracy produces rules and leads to rigidity.” Furthermore, when schools are forced to meet so many demands and follow so many rules “[they] become too bureaucratic to respond to [peoples’] demands for quality education” (591). Lowood and Hailsham are both bureaucracies. They follow a

The most prominent model of bureaucracy was formulated by German Sociologist Max Weber during the nineteenth century. Webster’s model was formulated from the rampant patronage systems that existed during his time. Webster’s model proposed a solution for more professionally and efficiently managed merit-based organizations.Webster’s model however, represented a broad framework rather than an all encompassing model, complete in every detail.The central goal of Webster’s model was to make possible an optimum degree of control.Weber's bureaucratic theory emphasized the need for a hierarchical structure of power. It recognized the importance of division of labor and specialization. A formal set of rules was bound into the hierarchy structure to insure stability and uniformity. Weber also put forth the notion that organizational behavior is a network of human interactions, where all behavior could be understood by looking at cause and effect. He prescribed these five key elements(1) division of labor and functional specialization, (2) hierarchy, (3) maintenance of files and other records, and

However, despite Max Weber’s theory that bureaucracies are like iron “iron cages” that are a efficient form of administration. Prior to modern government reform patronage, spoils, and bribery were just part of the political environment for Public Administrators. In today’s, modern government Public Administrators are hired based on the merit and technical qualifications that secure the individual can carry out the duties of the office. However, Public Administrators are forced to work in a hierarchical organization

Some have seriously misinterpreted Weber and have claimed that he liked bureaucracy, that he believed that bureaucracy was an "ideal" organization. Others have pronounced Weber "wrong" because bureaucracies do not live up to his list of "ideals". Others have even claimed that Weber "invented" bureaucratic organization. But Weber described bureaucracy as an “ideal type” in order to more accurately describes their growth in power and scope in the modern world. His studies of bureaucracy still form the core of organizational sociology.

The environment and the state of affairs in which Max Weber developed the theory of bureaucracy were different from the present welfare states. Modern states are complex and difficult to maintain thus the validity of bureaucracy is questioned in the face of these challenges.

Weber states that organizations regulations are formed by few people and this people are the boss, administration employee who tends to have representation powers (Roth and Wittich, 1968). Weber states that the state tends to use bureaucracy on its people in order to establish authority. Bureaucracy is present in various areas in the environment and once bureaucracy is produced then it becomes difficult to

Weber’s bureaucratic approach focuses on the importance of hierarchy by putting great emphasis on the use of rules, procedures and making impartial personnel decisions when managing. He put great emphasis on the jurisdiction, explaining that work should be “divided according to type and purpose” staying within the correct working unit just as the organization’s rules and laws would state (Milakovich, et. al., 2013, p. 146). A hierarchy would be established with a chain of command clearly identifying a system of super- and

While he highlights a lot of positives, he also saw a lot of issues within bureaucracy. Webers’ bureaucracy is a bottom line model that values calculable decision making over all else. Within this model are the people, or parts, that can be replaced if they cause a decrease in productivity. The issue becomes that the rationalized view of bureaucratic systems is unable to see individuals and respond to individual needs. There is a format and if someone does not fit in, or if they begin to fall behind, there is no understanding or support. His argument is that the bureaucratization of our world has made it depersonalized.

Through analyzing the written works of Max Weber’s Types of Legitimate Domination and Bureaucracy to C. Wright Mills’ The Sociological Imagination, the writings of the comparative authors reveal the domination of power in a socially constructed society and the way that individuals are influenced by the constructed hierarchy of power. Through sociological analysis, these concepts can be applied to the ways individuals are continuously influenced through socially constructed institutions in a society where individuals constantly interact with one another. As Mills and Weber apply sociological analysis to the context of their observations, they are able to observe the growing positive and negative influences that ultimately shape the

Based on this right, the bureaucracy designed by Weber has clear division of labor; thoroughly indicated hierarchical relationship and pointed out impersonal relationship (Crozier, 1964). In the course of history, there have been various more perfect organizational systems, therefore, bureaucratic theory was questioned and criticized by many scholar. However, there are still certain organizations that use bureaucracy theory to design the corporate structure despite many critical views.

Max Weber's theory of rationalization is an extensively studied theory within sociology. Weber’s theory uses the model of bureaucracy to symbolize the constant shifting ways of our society. Rationalization is the process of replacing rationally consistent rules for conventional or rather illogical rules within society. According to Weber, bureaucracy is the fundamental model of rational rule. They are extremely predictable, in both the job process but also labor production. Bureaucracies are more worried with the amount of production than the value of the product itself. Weber viewed this structure as ineffective and completely flawed.

This essay is a critical analysis of the theories given by Max Weber of leadership, religion and rationalization.