Critically evaluate the following claim: “At a time when the digital revolution is
changing every aspect of human life… change-resistant and often wasteful
bureaucratic structures are a drag on [business] growth. Bureaucracy impedes
employees’ creativity, undermines their self-motivation, and hinders their
workplace happiness. Therefore, the need to transform business … has
become more pressing than ever before” (from Hamel and Zanini, 2020: 12-13).
Is bureaucracy obsolete and, if so what is meant to succeed it?
Bureaucracy is a model of organisation developed by Max Weber and it is formulated on a
rational-legal perspective of control. This idea is a system that has a set of absolute rules and
procedures that are in place for employees to understand their specified role in an organisation
and, the different levels of authority that they would have in that organisation. Through Hamel
and Zanini’s claim, we can understand that this response is a postmodern perspective on
bureaucracy, and we can assume that the other form of organisational control that they would
align with is post bureaucracy. In this essay, I will critically evaluate whether bureaucracy is
obsolete by looking at how this organisational form impacts business growth and the
employee’s development and satisfaction at the workplace.
1.
Firstly, bureaucracy can be considered obsolete due to organisational characteristics in this
control form that have negative influences for a business. These negative issues that would
arise in an organisation is a lack of motivation, and an organisation having a producer
focused culture. This can impede an employee’s development because, rules and
procedures in an organisation limits the responsibilities of the role and therefore will not have
the opportunity to make decisions on how they would want to operate, which further stops
different ways to perform the job. Moreover, due to formal rules being in place it means that
employees are expected to perform responsibilities so, an organisation would not see what
they did as an achievement but as a requirement for the job. This can influence employees
to not align themselves with the organisational objectives as this is dehumanising as an
organisation would only use them for nothing but their objectives. Due to this, bureaucratic
organisations have a producer focused mentality which can mean that business growth in
the organisation can have negative implications as well. This is because, employees would
apply the same rules in all aspects of their work. However, in relation to dealing with social
processes using the same rules may cause negative impact because, arguably employees
should adjust to different customers in order solve individual cases but instead they are
forced to follow the rules which can impact customer retention. Critics such as Merton, 1940,
have argued that under the influence of bureaucracy through time, an employee will start to
view the rules in an organisation as the purpose of the role rather than viewing the rule as
something that is used to produce the result of what the task is. However, commentators
such as Reich,1993, have pointed out that you need to have a certain level of skill in order to
gain a better treatment in an organisation. This means that bureaucracy may only be
obsolete if high level skilled jobs are involved and vice-versa if low skilled jobs were involved
as, bureaucracy can be used in these particular cases and it could result in growth for the
business as, this is an easier function that they can control and make efficient continuously.
Secondly, the organisational form of control that is argued to have succeeded bureaucracy is
post bureaucracy however, this idea has issues that can impede positive development of an
organisation and employee. Post bureaucracy is based on an emphasis of soft skills being
used by employees and creates an environment where shared responsibility and values are
promoted in an organisation. Also, there is an emphasis on treating employees as individuals
by decentralising designated workspaces and hours. An employee under this form of control
can use their creativity to solve particular tasks resulting in a chance for them to gain a sense
of self achievement and, to feel satisfied at the workplace. Moreover, satisfying employees
can mean in return the business can grow. However, negative issues can arise such as, a
weak form of control and the potential danger of employees having the freedom to perform
their job role. Harris and Wegg-Prosser, 2007, have argued that the digital revolution has
blended work and life balance meaning that employees under a post bureaucratic system
would be working 24/7 to try and handle the intensification of work pressures. In doing so they
will experience negative effects to their mental health and may resist the form due to the
intensification of time pressure. This links to the danger of individual freedom as, employees
have the chance of failing objective goals for the organisation which can have a negative effect
of the growth of both business and employee. In addition, an employee may resist shared
values and responsibility due to the system itself and may not be using their full capabilities to
complete the objective as best they can mean, the business could be losing to competitors.
Contrastingly, from a bureaucratic point of view, even though fixed rules can limit business
growth it at least limits the failure to success ratio that would happen in an organisation as
well.
Finally, we looked at whether bureaucracy has become obsolete. We have critically evaluated
aspects of bureaucracy and how it can be viewed as obsolescent for an organisation to use
however, we then looked at what would succeed this, which is post bureaucracy and we have
looked at how it works and looked at how this system can just as easily turn obsolete for the
organisation as well. Overall, my view is that bureaucracy is not obsolete, and it still has a part
to play in organisations as, in specific job roles, bureaucracy can be used to create efficiency
in the organisation while high level job roles that need high skill should be using post
bureaucratic systems in order to get the best out of the employee and the improve the growth
of the business.
Word count: 941
2.
“Today even the most highly placed managers represent themselves as
innocent victims of [technological developments] for which they accept no
responsibility” (Weizenbaum, 1993: 241). Discuss with reference to, on the one
hand ‘Technological Determinism’, and on the other, either the “Social Shaping
of Technology” (SST) or the “Social Construction of Technology” (SCOT).
Illustrate your answer with examples.
Technology refers to methods, systems, and devices which are the result of scientific
knowledge being used for practical purposes (Collins English dictionary, 1994). In relation to
this point there is also an importance on the set of human activities that engages with the
technology because we play a part using our knowledge and skills that are needed to make it
operate as well. In this essay, I will be discussing about Weizenbaum’s 1993 statement and
specifically, I will be discussing how this statement relates to two contrasting viewpoints on
technology which are technological determinism (TD) and the social shaping of technology
(SST). TD views technology as the only key factor in place that can create change in society
and will heavily influence how society is functioned. SST views technology as one of the
factors for how society functions as, aspects such as social and economic come into effect
which can further influence the shape of technology in that society as well.
First, through a TD perspective, highly placed managers can’t completely control the business
functions within the organisation as through time technological developments are going to
change and all they can do is conform to the advancements and try to adapt to it. An example
of TD is the internet as, this technological development has transformed societies in how
individuals and groups functions daily, it has also changed how businesses operate and have
created new types of organisations as well, social media, bitcoin, NFT’s, etc. Through this
example we see society has changed and you must conform to it otherwise you will experience
new problems that come with the technology. For example, a UK student needs to have
access to the internet to apply for student finance, there is no other way to apply for it. By an
individual not being able to keep up with technical demands it means that you will receive
negative implications. TD commentator Woodward ,1965, describes how organisational
structures have a relationship with the technical demands for specific technical cases. This
relationship is important for highly placed managers as, they are going to have to ensure that
the functions in place are conforming to the current state of society that technology is in so,
the business they are operating can compete or possibly beat other competitors. If employees
are unable to keep up with technology that managers are implementing, then it means that
they potentially could, managers may have no choice but replace said worker with someone
that has the right skills for the job. Moreover, when a manager does do this it means that they
would be able to use TD to remove that person from a role as, it is not their fault that they had
to remove the individual, it is just that technology advancements have meant that the
organisation won’t be able to keep the employee because they are not be efficient at their job.
However, through a critical perspective of TD Schaefur, 2003, argues that managers use TD
as a political resource which means that they use it to increase the amount of power that they
have in the organisation and they will be able to use it as an excuse for letting individuals leave
in the organisation and the situation would be more trouble free and as they will less likely
resist.
Secondly, through the SST perspective, highly placed managers can’t be innocent victims to
the technological developments as social and economic factors are also developing with
technology therefore meaning that, managers need to ensure that the technology that they
are overseeing is being operated properly with its function dependant on the society they are
in as, these would be accepted norms that are in place. Furthermore, it means that individuals
that are working for managers would also come with expectations such as, improving the skills
and knowledge of the individual so that they are able to use the technology in the way that
has shown to use in that society. However though, this will only apply if the this is the accepted
social and economic processes that are present in a manager in another society may have
the opposite of this society and in turn would not have to deal with these various aspects. An
example of SST is, in China the biggest social media platform is WeChat and through the
social, economic and political processes this is what people in the country are using however,
in the United Kingdom people in the country are using Facebook and Instagram the most. This
is the same type of technology, but socio-cultural factors show the differences of what people’s
society. SST commentators such as, Thomas, 1994, have stated that technology is not seen
as an external influence and it is the people and organisations that are the force that moves
technology. This further shows why a manager must accept responsibilities and is unable to
use technological developments as an excuse because, there is an acceptance in this view
that people have the power to affect how technologies, attitudes, norms, cultures of that
society which means, if they are not able to conform to these beliefs a dysfunctional
organisation can come in effect or, major resistance from employees and stake holders can
happen in the organisation.
Overall, we have looked at how TD and SST views Weizenbaum’s statement and we are able
to identify how through these different aspects of viewing technology can change its meaning
due to the different viewpoints. TD clearly shows how managers would be able to use
technological developments as a means and can avoid accepting responsibility. Contrastingly,
SST can’t use technological development as a means as cultural, social and organisational
factors are regarded and takes it part into the development of the organisation which means
that managers would in turn need to ensure that an organisation is able to handle the business
functions of the organisation as these factors are also developing with technology.
Words: 988