Gather Multiple Perspectives

Reading 2B

THE BUREAUCRATIC ADMINISTRATOR

Nothing pleases me more than the sight of my company’s organization chart. To see all the little boxes, each one pregnant with power and authority, with the lines between them mapping out the exact relationships between managers, gives me the sense of structure and permanency I crave. Majestically alone at the top of the hierarchy are the rule-makers—directors, presidents, and CEOs—and as my eye scans down the page, the tiers of managers thicken with the names of underlings, those to whom the rules apply. Rules, I’m reminded, hold it all together.

Most people who scoff at bureaucracy hold independent leadership in high esteem. I say that a bureaucracy has the resiliency and staying power to endure without leadership. Leaders come and go; organizations have rules to keep them stable. And the more clearly and emphatically the rules are written, so much the better. Ultimately, authority resides in the rules, not in the whims of capricious leaders. It is all so simple.

I think the rules of our company are particularly clear. Our 1,897-page rules manual and its 122 appendices specify all procedures, protocols, policies, restrictions, and prohibitions as plain as day, as well as the consequences for flouting them. The manual lays out the mission, responsibilities, and authority of every job title. Everything is there for all to read. Nowhere is there ambiguity. There can be no excuse for not knowing the rules. If perchance an employee, either from perversity or unimaginable ignorance, fails to understand any aspect of the rules, then our managers, who have committed every rule to memory, will immediately communicate the meaning of the rule to the employee in no uncertain language.

Does this sound cold and unfriendly? I prefer to characterize bureaucratic principles as objective. A rational, orderly system has no place for personal feelings, which are often esoteric, irrational, and disruptive. Decisions from subjective considerations have unpredictable repercussions, but an unwavering allegiance to the rules keeps operations running smoothly. That’s what rules are for. Objectivity must prevail at all costs.

Even our hiring practices include objective measures—written tests—to eliminate any hint of favoritism and bias. No employee who is rational can complain, because we lay out our rules to all employees when they are hired. Their agreement to work for us is tantamount to their agreement to abide by the rules (see Company Rules, §12.38.412). In that way, all employees help perpetuate the system.

Once hired, an employee can advance according to two simple criteria, seniority and measurable achievement. Salary? We have tables for that, with rows and columns showing job-title categories, years with the company, and measures of achievement such as sales figures. These charts are no secret. Every employee knows his or her exact standings on the salary scale.

The rules are nothing if not enforced. Managers carefully monitor the conduct of the employees for infractions of the rules. If an employee’s behavior is unacceptable, the manager is to take immediate and decisive disciplinary action (see Company Rules, §45.67.13).

Once the rules are solidly ensconced in the collective mind of the organization, it little matters whether any particular leader comes or goes. Thanks to the rules, my company has structure, stability, continuity, and discipline. In a word, the company runs itself.

What else but rules could possibly make such beautiful order out of something as stubborn and fickle as human nature!

Questions to Ponder

1. What single element of leadership seems to motivate the Bureaucrat?

2. How would you like to work for the organization described by the bureaucrat? Why or why not?

3. Is it possible to create a psychological environment completely devoid of subjectivity? Why or why not?

4. How important is objectivity to a well-running organization? Explain. Is subjectivity important? Why or why not?

5. What human qualities does such an organization reward? What qualities does it penalize?

6. What is the bureaucrat’s moral view of the organization? Of managers and leaders? Of individual employees?

7. What are the strengths of such an organizational scheme? What are the weaknesses?

8. Does an employee have any right to object to rules to which he or she agreed when taking the job?

Sources

Hitt, W. (1990) Ethics and Leadership: Putting Practice into Theory (Copyright © 1990), with permission of Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus, OH.

That source, in turn, drew heavily from Gerth, H. H., and C. Wright Mills (Eds.) (1946) From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology, New York: Oxford University Press.