Pros and Cons of Bureaucratic Approach towards Managing Contemporary Organizations

However, Shafritz et al. (2015) associated the bureaucratic form features like specialization, hierarchy and formalization as signs of the existence of bureaucracy in management today. The current study will explore the pros and cons associated with bureaucracy in contemporary organizations. The paper argues that for the bureaucracy to remain relevant and useful in contemporary organizations, they must improve the human resource forces, cultural features and enhance continuous improvement of policy and guidelines in an organization. To critically evaluate the research area; the paper analyzes the specific role that bureaucracy impact, benefits and challenges associated with bureaucracy management. A bureaucratic organization has four defining benchmarks related to the hierarchy of authority, span of control, division of labour, and structure (Whisenand & Ferguson, 2014, p. Primarily, it includes the chain of command and unity of command, the sharing of responsibility and authority, and the duty to report.

The structure is the logical association of the functions and positions within an organization, arranged to accomplish the objectives of the organization. Conventional organizations have two basic positions, the line and the staff. Both positions can be arranged in four ways: purpose, process, people (clientele), and place where services are rendered. The researcher engaged in the process of collection and analysis of data as a way of exploring the impact that bureaucracy has on the performance and management of organizations (Frenkel et al. In summary, the researcher found that bureaucratic form of organizational structure has features shown below based on evidence from past studies. 1) Bureaucratic leadership is featured high division of labour with each labour segment having clearly defined responsibilities (Cole, 2004).

2) The posts grading and subordinates are under the command of their senior officials who make decisions, rules and regulations that affect their delivery of service (Cole, 2004). 3) The bureaucratic organizations have professional and technical qualifications that are critical during the selection process (Cole, 2004). The bureaucratic management system is viewed to promote tightness in the management of an organization. The structural bureaucratic support power structure enhances aspects of reliability in decision making. The element is encouraged by the fact that each staff in the workforce has a hierarchical structure that clearly defines the reference terms indicating specific department or position each category of operation falls under for transfer or resolution (Cole, 2004). Furthermore, the structure clearly defines the decision makers in the enterprise and has limits for decisions at each hierarchical level (Weber, 2009).

The bureaucratic type of management is strict where the rule of law and policies are avoidable between an individual and the enterprise. The fourth advantage associated with the bureaucratic system is the aspect of universality due to an irreversible trend that continues to affect organizations (Frenkel et al. Basing on the theory of bureaucracy, big enterprises like government agencies, industrial organizations, religious institutions and trade unions rely on in delivery of services. In contemporary organizations, bureaucratic organization arises as a common organization form (Spenser, 1994). Another advantage associated with a bureaucratic form of administration is that individuals get separated from power. In such systems, there is freedom of the system from randomness, subjectivity, volatility and prejudice influence of conventional organizations. For instance, the United States in the 1950s introduced a ‘Weber hot' as Germany had ‘Weber revival' in 1960s movements which got to the extent of the City of Munich being referred to as ‘The Square of Max Weber' (Beetham, 2013).

The case of Asia Bureaucracy Experience Asia is one of the regions that have experienced significant growth through which public service management has improved the region’s competitive position in the global market. Japanese scholars also introduced the aspects of Weber as part of their management methods for comparative studies in different disciplines relating to the theory of Weber on management. In Taiwan, Singapore, and Hong Kong, there was growth in passion on the implementation of Weber's Bureaucratic Management Theory in enterprise organizations (Spencer, 1994). Weber's theory application resulted in a significant increase in regional competitiveness. Weber stated that though it was inevitable, it does not promote entrepreneurial spirit in an organization (Frenkel and Shire, 1998). Additionally, Churchill expressed the bureaucratic system as the worst type of organizational theories though its relevance has continued to thrive even in modern enterprise organizations.

Bureaucracy is viewed as an ideal theory for social enterprises where in reality, the organizational setting is featured by significant dynamics that the approach fails to acknowledge (Christensen et al. The strict guidelines, policies and detailed regulations in a bureaucratic system do not meet to this dynamism in an organizational setting. Case Study of Silicon Valley In the case of Silicon Valley Company, principles express some form of anti-bureaucratic views concerning management theories (Chun, 2001). The team leaders are no longer required to spend much of their time doing promotion, but focus on efficiency in the implementation of projects and career development in each of the staff (Andriani, 2011). Professor David A. Garvin of Harvard Business School explained that Silicon Valley is a company that is built by engineers for engineers where one should have the freedom in spending on design and fixing of bugs rather than supervising work done by others or dealing with those in higher hierarchies as in bureaucracies (Hamel & Breen, 2013).

Secondly, the bureaucratic administrative approach creates more emphasis on efficiency and interests in an organization a belief that makes it difficult to attain diverse social needs and individual requirements (Jaffee, 2001). Many companies in the modern economic systems work under the principles of innovation, creativity and entrepreneurship, which are hard to attain in a bureaucratic order. Most individuals cannot handle doing the same task over and over again, and that eventually leads to a decline in work performance. If the organization has a chain of command, trying to get an answer or carrying out a particular task needs approval from the individual above (Cole, 2004). This process could take up much time leaving with the results or actions to be rushed. The bureaucratic model for operating an organization could be a useful model to use an implement for any agency.

The main problems with using the model are that some of the employees do not like repetitive work. F. Bureaucratic theory and the choice of central bank goals: the The case of the Bank of Canada. Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, 5(2), pp. Andriani, P. Diversity, knowledge and complexity theory: some primary issues. 1177/0891241609342230 Child, J. and McGrath, R. G. Organizations unfettered: Organizational form in an Information-intensive economy. Academy of management journal, 44(6), pp. A. Management theory and practice. Cengage Learning EMEA. Donaldson, L. The contingency theory of organizations. The future of management. Harvard Business Press. Jaffee, D. Organization Theory: Tension and change. McGraw-Hill Humanities Social. S. & Jang, Y. S. Classics of organization theory. Cengage Learning. Burning Man at Google: a cultural infrastructure for new media production.