Social Structure From The Modernist, Symbolic Interpretive, And The Postmodern Perspectives

According to Bolman and Deal, the core premise of the structural lens is defined as “Clear, well-understood goals, roles, and relationships and adequate coordination are essential to performance” (pg. 44). In an organization, structure is of vital importance, it lays a sturdy foundation which serves to decrease confusion and inefficiency amongst individuals of the organization. The core premise emphasizes that in order for an organization to reach its full potential, goals need to comprehended, appropriate roles need to be assigned to individuals and good management are imperative in bringing together an organization and increasing proficiency, in order to achieve established goals. Structure in an organization serves as the framework, where

Could you image at the age of fourteen not having any education and living in extreme poverty everyday? Using the lens of symbolic interactionism, this essay will analyze Maria’s education, gang surroundings, and family conditions. In the beginning, I will define symbolic interactionism, then I will explain why Maria a fourteen year old girls conditions contain these elements. Finally I will explain how symbolic interactionism is integrated into her life.

If group is deemed a reference group, consider how this group affects or hasaffected your lifepersonally and/or professionally? If you select any organizations for youranalysis, consider Weber’s five characteristics of an ideal bureaucracy and suggest which (if any) of the characteristics are directly applicable to your organization. From personal experience, examine the positive and negative ramifications of operating within a bureaucratic structure.

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

The bureaucratic model of leadership is based on the concept of fixed duties that are maintained through a hierarchy of authority. Max Weber (1800) believed that organizations had one critical weakness and that was closely interacting with employees and simulating a family or community like environment. He believed that the only way that and organisation could be run was by separating work and pleasure and ensuring that employees followed a stick code of conduct which would be enforced and managed by more trustworthy and higher ranking employees. However while prominent for over a century the bureaucratic management model has become scarcely used in the last few decades as more and more organisations seem to be gradually reverting to pre bureaucratic values. Organisations like Valve and Google have cause the diminishment of the

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.

Blau and Scott (2016) devised a set of qualities they argued delineated a formal organization from a truly informal organization. They quickly confirmed that social organizations would not conform to the characteristics of a formal organization. Formal organizations emerge when there is “an explicit purpose to achieve certain goals” (Blau and Scott, 2016, p. 175). Size and complexity as well as the existence of an administrative structure help to portray a formal organization. Other factors that characterize a formal organization include the intensity of the bureaucracy and hierarchy within the organization. Of note, Blau and Scott indicated that “formal organizations are man-made” (2016, p. 177) unlike social or informal organizations. Unexpectedly, they confirm that “informal organizations arise in every formal one” (Blau and Scott, 2016, p. 175). The formal organization is “the organization”, not the informal one that exists within; however, it is vital to understand the nature of the informal organization and attached social relations and unofficial norms (Blau and Scott,

In order for one to evaluate and identify with the diverse business structures, he/she must be aware of the meaning and standards that makes that structure. Various businesses functions in different ways as the world is full of technology and new structures, company cultures and new ways in which companies are run. In order to fully grasp the concepts of Organizational structure and culture in the movies, I will use the Movie Up in the Air and The Devil Wear Prada movies to analyze a business scenario from them.

Social structures are the most important aspects of human society. Social structure is the foundation upon which human society is created from. Therefore, it is necessary that we understand what social structures actually are. These structures are what organize the social relationships and institutions within a society, making it possible for the existence of a society. As a result, the question of how and why social structures matter are important in understanding how social structures work. Therefore, social structures are important because they force us to take on new perspectives in the analysis of everyday experiences, produce the social structures and institutions that control us, analyze the manifest and latent functions they serve, observe the objectivity of social reality and finally they allow for an intimate evaluation of ones self and social position. Consequently, social structure is relevant in my daily life because it has forced me to change how I look at myself and my own experiences and more importantly the power that the historical context and its social structures exert on my personal consciousness. As a result, Mills makes the argument that we are falsely led to believe that our current social position in society is due to our own effort and doing. This argument reflects social reality and it is the result of the social structures that are present in society, and the interplay between societal history and biography. According to Mills, the ability to

Classical and contemporary criticisms have approached bureaucracy as a vehicle for social commentary. Classical theories emphasise the early ages of management, which heavily rely on the structure of the organisation. In contrast, neoclassical theories argue that bureaucracy is ‘dead’ and has no place in the modern workplace, criticizing that is it demoralizing and complex. Organizations chose to adopt either a bureaucratic or a post-bureaucratic structure in their practices to achieve their ultimate goal. However, in management terms, both styles have their strengths and challenges. Underpinning these advantages and disadvantages is essential to build a deeper understanding of why bureaucracy is a debatable subject, and why rules must exist in order to have a well-organized work environment.

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.

For many years, organizations have been structures as bureaucracy. The term bureaucracy refers to a system of an organization that incorporates order, the utilization of hierarchical authority, and logic to conduct its business. Bureaucracy systems are meant to be fair, orderly and effective. The main features are formal procedures and rules, comprehensive division of labor, authority hierarchy, and promotion of employees and managers is based on competency. Currently, many people have a negative perception of bureaucracy because it is rigid and responds slowly to environmental changes and that it relies heavily on rules and procedures. However, in reality, bureaucracy has been found to be beneficial to organizations

One of the characteristics in bureaucratic organization is the division of labor as stated by Martin, J., Knopoff, K. and Beckman, C., (1998). The division of labor focuses on the practice of specialization where every individual will be assigned with different roles and smaller sets of tasks based on one’s abilities. This has proven to improve efficiency as each individuals will be performing tasks which they are most qualified for. As times goes, the individuals will eventually become more professional in performing complex tasks as they are well specialized in their roles. Moreover, one of the essentials when it comes to managing a bureaucratic organization is the establishment of formal rules. All employees from all levels of organization are expected to obey the rules at all times with no consideration of employee’s rank or status. In accordance to Bozeman, B. and Rainey, H. G. (1998), there are still managers who claims to need more rules in order to keep the organization running effectively. With the presence of these formal rules, employees tend to be more consistent in applying the rules while performing their duties. Furthermore, it is also believed that, better control in an organization gains greater efficiency as discussed by Weber cited in Button, G., Martin, D., O’Niell, J., Colombina, T., (2012). In order for an organization to function efficiently, Weber believes that the employees should be career professional as this ensures the assigned duties to be performed well regardless of the side pressures while handling the tasks and also to ensure the operation of the organization will be run smoothly. With that being said, one can conclude that bureaucratic organization does bring uncountable benefits to the

The mechanistic structure is the traditional or classical design, common in many medium- and large-size organizations. Mechanistic organizations are somewhat rigid in that they consist of very clearly delineated jobs, have a well-defined hierarchical structure, and rely heavily on the formal chain of command for control. Bureaucratic organizations, with their emphasis on formalization, are the primary form of mechanistic structures. According to Max Weber, bureaucracy is a form of organization characterized by a rational, goal-directed hierarchy, impersonal decision making, formal controls, and subdivision into managerial positions and specialization of labor. Bureaucratic organizations are tall consisting of hierarchies with many levels of management. In a tall structure, people become relatively confined to their

In the early 1900’s, some of the first ideas were thrown together to allow an organization to flourish in the upcoming modern era. The first theories were known as scientific and classical management, which focused on three separate theories from Frederick Taylor, Henri Fayol, and Max Weber. The three theories have similar ideology in the fact that organization is driven by management authority, employees only source of motivation is money, and organizations are machinelike with employees making up the parts of the machine (Papa, Daniels, & Spiker, 2008). In the Prophecy Fulfilled case study, Mary Ann (senior auditor) takes on a management role with subordinates similar to that of Weber’s Bureaucratic Theory (Daniels 1987, pp. 77-78).