Summary of the Theory
As per the theory, bureaucracy involves a clear-cut decision of activities that are regarded as roles or duties inherent within the office. Moreover, sanctions and controls are made clear in the company regulations. Roles are accorded to workers according to their technical qualifications, and these are ascertained through impersonal procedures such as examinations. Moreover, the experts and salaried people in the firms are guided by a set of rules, which show them how to solve each case in their work tenure (Merton, 2017). Still, the bureaucratic official is selected by superiors through procedures such as impersonal competition, as no elections occur within the structures. Besides, the election of the officials is done with the intention of affecting the purposes of the organization. Moreover, most of the bureaucratic firms are run with the intention of having long time tenure in the absence of obstacles that would affect the size of the business (Merton, 2017). Bureaucracies' merit is the technical efficiencies they provide and the speed, expert control, precision, discretion and continuity, which they provide. Moreover, the low level of personal relationships also serves to make every activity official. There are as well reduced non-rational considerations such as effectual involvements, anxiety, as well as hostility in the organizations. The theory also posits that more people have realized that to work they must assume the position of employees in the bureaucratic firms, as this provides them with the tools they need to work (Merton, 2017). In this regard, there is a separation between workers and their tools, creating a need for them to seek employment. Case in point, soldiers no longer own their weapons just as the workers do not own their tools in the theory. Consequently, the bureaucratic organization tries to keep all their production activities as private affairs as a way of avoiding competition from their rivals in the private sector.
Conceptual Critique of the Theorist
Bureaucracies have imperfections, which are not mentioned in the theory, one being that people's abilities in the bureaucracies become blind spots. Albeit workers may have passed examinations and performed well in the past to earn certain positions, the changes that may occur may cause them and their skills to become obsolete in the firm (Merton, 2017). However, the bureaucracies may chose to retain them despite the weaknesses. Moreover, formalism makes the structures almost ritualistic with little room for changes, and this may affect the results obtained negatively.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Personal Critique/ Personal Reactions
I feel that the theory makes people too rigid and kills any chances of growth and flexibility. When one proves through exams and other tests that they are good for a post, they may fully abandon self-improvement, making themselves ineligible for higher positions or better performance in future. Moreover, the theory ignores coaching and mentoring functions, which ensure the continuity of firms. Instead, relationships are impersonal, and this may serve to increase the conflict and stress levels within the organizations. Consequently, the firms may fail to perform as expected. Moreover, people do not have to be employed to work yet the theory makes that ignorant assumption. The reality is that most people have gone into private businesses and they are able to utilize their working abilities and make money better than the employed fellows.
Locate the Theories in a Historical Context
In a historical context, the bureaucratically theory would best work for the early 20th century organizations as opposed to the modern firms.
References
Merton R., (2017). Bureaucratic Structure and Personality. Glencoe, IL: Free Press
