bureaucracy

View more History, Politics, Society videos

For more information on bureaucracy, visit Britannica.com.

Government by permanent office-holders. The term was coined in eighteenth-century France, and first appeared in English in 1818, in both cases with pejorative overtones built in from the beginning. The pejorative overtones are still current in everyday usage and in semi-jocular references to such maxims of bureaucracy as Parkinson's Law (‘Work expands to fill the time available for it’).

The first writer to view bureaucracy more favourably was Max Weber. Weber argued that working to the rules in a hierarchical office in which appointment and promotion went by merit was more rational than making appointments on other bases such as patronage. Weber also stressed the tension between bureaucrats and elected officials. The latter may wish to give favours to their supporters in return for votes. Bureaucrats may be expected to obstruct this.

Most subsequent sociological writing on bureaucracy has been an extended footnote to Weber. An important extension, due especially to Michel Crozier (The Bureaucratic Phenomenon, English edition, 1964) stresses the difference in motives between the bureaucrat at the top of the organization and the bureaucrat at the bottom. The latter wants a quiet life which may best be ensured by slavish adherence to the rules, whatever they are. The former may have more elevated aims for the bureaucracy which are frustrated by inability to force the routine employee to have the same aims as the bureau. Generally, means become ends in themselves. This difficulty is shared with firms. Indeed, the Weberian analysis of bureaucracy is intended to apply just as much to the firm as to the government office. Therefore it gives no support to the ‘New Right’ proposition that governments are less efficient than markets.

Many of the economists who have investigated bureaucracy, however, have made precisely that claim. W. A. Niskanen, in Bureaucracy and Representative Government (1971), argues that the bureaucrat seeks to maximize his or her budget and therefore systematically to overproduce bureau goods and services. The politician to whom the bureau reports would like to control its costs, but faces what economists call an ‘agency problem’. The only reliable information on the costs of the bureau comes from the bureau itself, unless the politicians erect a second bureau to check on the costs of the first. This is done to a limited extent (for instance by the Office of Management and Budget in the United States and the audit office, which has gone by various names and which serves the Public Accounts Committee, in the UK Parliament). But who is to check on the costs of the second agency, or check that the audit agency is not conniving with the agency it is auditing? Once again, however, note that these problems are shared by public and private bureaucracy. Auditing has not prevented a number of notable scandals in recent company history. Therefore, although the Niskanen model is elegant and has spawned many studies of bureaucracy, it provides less ammunition for the privatization programme of governments in the 1980s than its partisans claim.

1. An administrative organization based on a hierarchical structure and governed by written rules and established procedures. The authority attached to an official and the position of an official within the hierarchy depends on the office held, rather than the personal attributes and status of the incumbent.

2. A term used pejoratively to describe any official process that is deemed inefficient or unnecessarily obstructive.

At the beginning of the twenty-first century, the federal bureaucracy consisted of 2.8 million people; almost 19 million Americans work for governments of some type, from federal to local units. In a famous lecture given in 1918, the great sociologist Max Weber predicted that the twentieth century would be an era in which governments would be dominated by professional politicians and professional bureaucrats. In most advanced industrialized democracies, Weber's prediction was born out fully. In the United States, however, the bureaucracy has not attained the degree of power or influence that Weber anticipated. The reasons for this relate to the special history of the bureaucracy in the United States.

Most advanced, industrialized democracies developed a professional, permanent bureaucracy around the middle of the nineteenth century. European reformers argued that the expanding role of government in a more urbanized and industrialized society required professional bureaucrats to make government work. Bureaucracies should consist, particularly at their highest levels, of highly educated and trained people organized rationally, not of people who were selected on the basis of whom they knew or had supported in the previous election. Such arguments were made forcefully in the United States as well, particularly later in the nineteenth century by Progressive reformers. However, the shift from patronage to a professionalized, merit-based bureaucracy ran into problems in the United States. First, the notion that making government work required special skills, talents, or education had been rejected by the Jacksonians as incompatible with American values of equality and participation. In the Federalist era, the United States had taken some limited steps along the road toward the creation of a bureaucracy composed of socially superior and educated men. Andrew Jackson reversed these trends, firmly establishing the notion that any (white) man could run government. Second, government jobs were crucial to the workings of American political parties until well into the twentieth century; "to the victor the spoils" was a key principle of party organization. Supporters expected to be rewarded with, among other things, government jobs if their party won. Parties were naturally unwilling to hand over as crucial an element in securing power as government jobs to a merit-based bureaucracy.

In spite of these problems, reformers did ultimately secure the creation of a merit-based system. The assassination of President James A. Garfield by a disappointed job seeker also highlighted the difficulties of operating a patronage system. The triumph of the Progressive reformers seemed to be completed by the New Deal, which resulted in a vast expansion in the number of government agencies and jobs. The practical problems of staffing the much-expanded government machine with political appointees, and the scale of political power that such vast opportunities for patronage could produce, were compelling reasons for completing the transition to a bureaucracy recruited and promoted on the basis of merit. From the New Deal onward, the majority of government jobs were awarded on the basis of merit, not patronage.

Yet the special factors inhibiting the growth of a professional bureaucracy in the United States insured that the reformers' triumph was never total. American government remained distinctive compared with other advanced industrialized democracies in retaining a thick layer of political appointees at the top of government departments. For much of the twentieth century, it seemed as though this layer of political appointees would gradually diminish in the face of practical problems and pressures from reformers. However, in the last few decades of the twentieth century, the number of political appointees began to increase again. In contrast to the situation in other advanced, industrialized democracies, the permanent bureaucracy was largely excluded from participation in policy making and was relegated to mere policy implementation.

Although American political parties no longer depended on patronage for their support as heavily as in the past, several trends emerged that discouraged reliance on the permanent bureaucracy. First, presidents, particularly Republican presidents, believed that the bureaucracy was ideologically predisposed against them and their policies. There is evidence that this belief had some empirical foundations in the Nixon era, though by the end of the twentieth century, bureaucrats had become noticeably more conservative and less Democratic in their personal politics. Second, all presidents found that the vast federal bureaucracy had become a "fourth branch of government" that was difficult to control. The bureaucracy had its own opinions on what constituted good policy and its own political alliances with interest groups and Congressional committees. Third, new styles of thinking, derived from microeconomics, emerged after World War II. In these "rational choice" perspectives, bureaucrats were not the selfless servants of the public good that Progressive reformers had intended but rather selfish maximizers of the size of their staffs and budgets. Writers in this school, such as William Niskanen, were particularly influential with Republican politicians. It followed that the power of bureaucrats should be reduced. Wherever possible, government work should be privatized or "contracted out" to privately owned firms. Senior bureaucrats should be limited in the role they played in developing policy and subordinated to political appointees whose loyalty to the administration was likely to be greater. However, it was a Democratic president, Jimmy Carter, who pushed through legislation that addressed these concerns by moving the most senior bureaucrats into a Senior Executive Service. With this, the president had far more control in the ability to reassign officials than over the rest of the civil service. Carter's reforms were invaluable in helping President Reagan impose radically conservative perspectives on the bureaucracy.

The distinctive history of the bureaucracy in the United States has had both advantages and disadvantages. Advantages have included the facilitated participation in government by large numbers of people from business, academic life, and other backgrounds who have served as political appointees in Washington. Political appointees have brought with them fresh perspectives and attitudes that a permanent bureaucracy may not provide. Most obvious among the system's disadvantages is the continued appointment of people to government service whose qualifications only include the payment of the large sums of money or services to the victorious presidential candidate. Additional disadvantages include the length of time it takes to appoint and secure Senate approval for the thousands of political appointees who arrive with a new administration, which complicates the smooth running of government. Although bureaucracies can be self-interested and slow to change, they can also provide politicians with much-needed advice and perspectives; good governance may result from the effective combination of the perspectives of bureaucrats and politicians.

Bibliography

Aberbach, Joel D., and Bert A. Rockman. In the Web of Politics. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution, 2001.

Light, Paul C. Thickening Government: Federal Hierarchy and the Diffusion of Accountability. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution, 1995.

Skowronek, Stephen. Building a New American State: The Expansion of National Administrative Capacities, 1876–1922. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1982.

—Graham K. Wilson

A system of administration wherein there is a specialization of functions, objective qualifications for office, action according to the adherence to fixed rules, and a hierarchy of authority and delegated power.

Organizations such as the armed forces or administrative agencies are common examples of bureaucracies.

An administrative or social system that relies on a set of rules and procedures, separation of functions and a hierarchical structure in implementing controls over an organization, government or social system. Large administrative staffs are most common in large organizations that need standardized rules and procedures or consistency across a wide range of business activities.

Investopedia Says:
Although some form of bureaucracy is necessary for large, efficiently run organizations, there is much debate over whether the theory is ever manifested in practice. The term is often used in a pejorative way, since many bureaucracies become too large to be efficient, and become dysfunctional as a result. Some form of bureaucracy is necessary, however, in firms that are subject to heavy regulatory scrutiny, since a loss of policy or oversight control could have dire consequences. 

It is a widely held belief that small companies can be more efficient because they do not need large bureaucracies and therefore can adapt and innovate very quickly. Large bureaucracies are also associated with more mature companies in mature industries nearing the end of their life cycles.

Related Links:
Learn this easy-to-understand technique of analyzing a company's financial statements and reports. Introduction To Fundamental Analysis
Learn about how the way a company keeps its management in check can affect the bottom line. Governance Pays
Look at the big picture when choosing a company - what you see may really be a stage in its industry's growth. Great Company Or Growing Industry?
If used properly, this ratio can give you insight into a company's productivity and financial health. Doing More With Less: The Sales-Per-Employee Ratio

LearnThatWord.com is a free vocabulary and spelling program where you only pay for results!

Quotes:

"I always get back to the question, is it really necessary that men should consume so much of their bodily and mental energies in the machinery of civilized life? The world seems to me to do much of its toil for that which is not in any sense bread. Again, does not the latent feeling that much of their striving is to no purpose tend to infuse large quantities of sham into men's work?" - William Allingham

"A bureaucracy is sure to think that its duty is to augment official power, official business, or official members, rather than to leave free the energies of mankind; it overdoes the quantity of government, as well as impairs its quality. The truth is, that a skilled bureaucracy is, though it boasts of an appearance of science, quite inconsistent with the true principles of the art of business." - Walter Bagehot

"A bureaucrat is a Democrat who holds some office a Republican wants." - Alben W. Barkley

"In the US we find the label requirements are crazy. It is almost as if we had to label a bookcase with the warning 'do not eat this bookcase -- it can be harmful to your health'." - Bjorn Bayley

"Poor fellow, he suffers from files." - Aneurin Bevan

"Nothing can be more contemptible than to suppose Public Records to be true." - William Blake

See more famous quotes about Bureaucracy

A formal, hierarchical organization with many levels in which tasks, responsibilities, and authority are delegated among individuals, offices, or departments, held together by a central administration. According to many sociologists and anthropologists, the development of bureaucratic organizations is necessary for the emergence of any modern civilization. (See Max Weber.)

• Governmental Bodies and Institutions - bureaucracy: large body of appointive government officials; complex structure of executive branch
• Social Structure and Conditions - bureaucracy: authority concentrated in complicated structure of administrative bodies

This article's lead section may not adequately summarize its contents. Please consider expanding the lead to provide an accessible overview of the article's key points. (May 2012)

Part of the Politics series
Politics
List of political topics Politics by country Politics by subdivision Political economy Political history Political history of the world Political philosophy Political science Political system Anarchist Capitalist City-state Communist Democracy Federacy Feudalism Mixed economy Dictatorship Directorial Meritocracy Monarchy Parliamentary Presidential Semi-presidential Theocracy International relations (theory) Political scientists Comparative politics Public administration Bureaucracy Street-level bureaucracy Adhocracy Public policy (Legal doctrine) Public interest Separation of powers Legislature Executive Judiciary Electoral branch Sovereignty Theories of political behavior Biology and political orientation
Subseries
Elections Electoral systems Voting Federalism Form of government Ideology Political campaigning Political parties
Politics portal
v t e

Part of the Politics series
Basic forms of government
Power structure
Confederal Federal Unitary
Power source
Aristocratic Popular Monarchy Oligarchy Constitutional Constitutional monarchy Technocracy Feudalism Plutocracy Democratic Direct Consensus Representative Theocratic Canonical Ecclesiastical Divine right Other Despotism Autocracy Totalitarianism Military Junta Military dictatorship Stratocracy Kritarchy
Legislative system
Authoritarian regime Republic Parliamentary Presidential
List of forms of government
Politics portal
v t e

For other uses, see Bureaucracy (disambiguation).

A bureaucracy is an organization of non-elected officials of a government or organization who implements the rules, laws, and functions of their institution.^[1]

Contents 1 Development 1.1 Ancient world 1.2 Modern world 1.2.1 Weberian bureaucracy 2 The economics of bureaucracy 3 See also 4 References 5 Further reading

Development

Bureaucracies date back to ancient societies across the globe.

Ancient world

Further information: Mesopotamia, Ancient Rome, Ancient China, and Ancient Egypt

This section is empty. You can help by adding to it.

Modern world

Weberian bureaucracy

An editor has expressed a concern that this section lends undue weight to certain ideas, incidents, controversies or matters relative to the article subject as a whole. Please help to create a more balanced presentation. Discuss and resolve this issue before removing this message. (October 2011)

Weberian bureaucracy has its origin in the works by Max Weber (1864-1920), a notable German sociologist, political economist, and administrative scholar who contributed to the study of bureaucracy and administrative discourses and literatures during the mid 1800s and early 1900s. Max Weber belongs to the Scientific School of Thought, who discussed such topics as specialization of job-scope, merit system, uniform principles, structure and hierarchy. His contemporaries include Frederick Taylor (1856-1915), Henri Fayol (1841-1925), Elton Mayo (1880-1949), and later scholars, such as Herbert A. Simon (1916-2001), Dwight Waldo (1913-2000), and others.^[2]

Bureaucratic administration means fundamentally domination through knowledge

— Max Weber^[3]

Weber described many ideal types of public administration and government in his magnum opus Economy and Society (1922). His critical study of the bureaucratisation of society became one of the most enduring parts of his work.^[3][4] It was Weber who began the studies of bureaucracy and whose works led to the popularization of this term.^[5] Many aspects of modern public administration go back to him, and a classic, hierarchically organized civil service of the Continental type is called "Weberian civil service".^[6] As the most efficient and rational way of organizing, bureaucratization for Weber was the key part of the rational-legal authority, and furthermore, he saw it as the key process in the ongoing rationalization of the Western society.^[3][4]

Weber listed several precondititions for the emergence of bureaucracy.^[7] The growth in space and population being administered, the growth in complexity of the administrative tasks being carried out, and the existence of a monetary economy requires a more efficient administrative system.^[7] Development of communication and transportation technologies makes more efficient administration possible but also in popular demand, and democratization and rationalization of culture resulted in demands that the new system treats everybody equally.^[7]

Weber's ideal bureaucracy is characterized by hierarchical organization, delineated lines of authority in a fixed area of activity, action taken on the basis of and recorded in written rules, bureaucratic officials need expert training, rules are implemented by neutral officials, career advancement depends on technical qualifications judged by organization, not individuals.^[3][7]

The decisive reason for the advance of bureaucratic organization has always been its purely technical superiority over any other form of organization

— Max Weber^[6]

While recognizing bureaucracy as the most efficient form of organization, and even indispensable for the modern state, Weber also saw it as a threat to individual freedoms, and the ongoing bureaucratization as leading to a "polar night of icy darkness", in which increasing rationalization of human life traps individuals in the aforementioned "iron cage" of bureaucratic, rule-based, rational control.^[3][8] In order to counteract bureaucrats, the system needs entrepreneurs and politicians.^[3]

The economics of bureaucracy

This section is empty. You can help by adding to it.

See also

Wikiquote has a collection of quotations related to: Bureaucracy

Wikimedia Commons has media related to: Bureaucracy

• Bureaucrat
• Michel Crozier
• Public administration
• Rationalization
• State (polity)
• Max Weber
• Red tape

References

1. ^ Wilson, Woodrow (1887). "The Study of Administration". Political Science Quarterly 2 (2): 197–222. JSTOR 2139277. 
2. ^ Jeong Chun Hai @Ibrahim. (2007). Fundamental of Development Administration. Selangor: Scholar Press. ISBN 978-967-5-04508-0
3. ^ ^{a b c d e f} Richard Swedberg; Ola Agevall (2005). The Max Weber dictionary: key words and central concepts. Stanford University Press. pp. 18–21. ISBN 978-0-8047-5095-0. http://books.google.com/books?id=_c3Mcnh8hCgC&pg=PA19. Retrieved 23 March 2011. 
4. ^ ^{a b} George Ritzer (29 September 2009). Contemporary Sociological Theory and Its Classical Roots: The Basics. McGraw-Hill. pp. 38–42. ISBN 978-0-07-340438-7. http://books.google.com/books?id=pX6pPwAACAAJ. Retrieved 22 March 2011. 
5. ^ Marshall Sashkin; Molly G. Sashkin (28 January 2003). Leadership that matters: the critical factors for making a difference in people's lives and organizations' success. Berrett-Koehler Publishers. p. 52. ISBN 978-1-57675-193-0. http://books.google.com/books?id=q12zbgs-jyYC&pg=PA52. Retrieved 22 March 2011. 
6. ^ ^{a b} Liesbet Hooghe (2001). The European Commission and the integration of Europe: images of governance. Cambridge University Press. p. 40. ISBN 978-0-521-00143-4. http://books.google.com/books?id=e15KnRiGipYC&pg=PA40. Retrieved 23 March 2011. 
7. ^ ^{a b c d} Kenneth Allan; Kenneth D. Allan (2 November 2005). Explorations in Classical Sociological Theory: Seeing the Social Worl. Pine Forge Press. pp. 172–176. ISBN [[Special:BookSources/978-1-4120-5927-9|978-1-4120-5927-9]]. 
8. ^ George Ritzer, Enchanting a Disenchanted World: Revolutionizing the Means of Consumption, Pine Forge Press, 2004, ISBN 0-7619-8819-X, Google Print, p.55

Further reading

• Albrow, Martin. Bureaucracy. London: Macmillan, 1970.
• On Karl Marx: Hal Draper, Karl Marx's Theory of Revolution, Volume 1: State and Bureaucracy. New York: Monthly Review Press, 1979.
• Marx comments on the state bureaucracy in his Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right and Engels discusses the origins of the state in Origins of the Family.
• Ernest Mandel, Power and Money: A Marxist Theory of Bureaucracy. London: Verso, 1992.
• On Weber: Watson, Tony J. (1980). Sociology, Work and Industry. Routledge. ISBN 0-415-32165-4. 
• Neil Garston (ed.), Bureaucracy: Three Paradigms. Boston: Kluwer, 1993.
• Chowdhury, Faizul Latif (2006), Corrupt Bureaucracy and Privatization of Tax Enforcement. Dhaka: Pathak Samabesh, ISBN 984-8120-62-9.
• Ludwig von Mises, Bureaucracy, Yale University Press, 1962. Liberty Fund (2007), ISBN 978-0-86597-663-4
• Weber, Max. The Theory of Social and Economic Organization. Translated by A.M. Henderson and Talcott Parsons. London: Collier Macmillan Publishers, 1947.
• Wilson, James Q. (1989). Bureaucracy. Basic Books. ISBN 0-465-00785--6. 

v t e Civil service in the executive branch of government Concepts Government agency Bureaucracy Bureaucrat Public administration Public services Public policy Public sector Terminology Permanent Secretary Undersecretary Commissioner Diplomatic service Civil services Australia Bangladesh Brazil Canada China European Union France Germany Hong Kong India Ireland Italy Japan Malaysia New Zealand Nigeria Northern Ireland Pakistan Singapore Sri Lanka United Kingdom United States Categories National civil service commissions Government occupations Civil service by country See also: Civil service reform in developing countries Imperial examination (Ancient China)

v t e Law Core subjects Administrative law Constitutional law Contract Criminal law Equity Evidence Law of obligations Procedure Civil Criminal Property law Public international law Public law Restitution Statutory law Tort Other subjects Admiralty law Aviation law Banking law Bankruptcy Commercial law Companies law Competition law Conflict of laws Consumer protection Cyberlaw Election law Energy law Entertainment law Environmental law Family law Financial regulation Health law Immigration law Intellectual property International criminal law International human rights Labour law Military law Product liability Space law Sports law Tax law Trust law Unjust enrichment Wills Sources of law Constitution Custom Decree Edict Executive order Delegated legislation Rulemaking Precedent Case law Statute Legal systems Canon law Civil law Common law Chinese law Jewish law Roman law Russian law Sharia Socialist law Statutory law Xeer Legal theory Critical legal studies Comparative law Economic analysis History International legal theory Philosophy Sociology Legal institutions Bureaucracy Civil society Election commission Executive Judiciary Legal profession Legislature Military Police Category Index Outline Portal

This entry is from Wikipedia, the leading user-contributed encyclopedia. It may not have been reviewed by professional editors (see full disclaimer)

Common misspelling(s) of bureaucracy

• beaurocracy

Dansk (Danish)
n. - bureaukrati, embedsmandsvælde

Nederlands (Dutch)
bureaucratie, ambtenarij

Français (French)
n. - bureaucratie

Deutsch (German)
n. - Bürokratie

Ελληνική (Greek)
n. - γραφειοκρατία

Italiano (Italian)
burocrazia

Português (Portuguese)
n. - burocracia (f)

Русский (Russian)
бюрократия

Español (Spanish)
n. - burocracia

Svenska (Swedish)
n. - byråkrati

中文（简体）(Chinese (Simplified))
官僚, 官僚机构, 官僚作风

中文（繁體）(Chinese (Traditional))
n. - 官僚, 官僚機構, 官僚作風

한국어 (Korean)
n. - 관료[제도,주의]

日本語 (Japanese)
n. - 官僚政治, 官僚主義, 官吏, 官僚, お役所仕事

العربيه (Arabic)
‏(الاسم) بيروقراطيه, تحكم موظفي الدوله, الجهاز الأداري للحكومه‏

עברית (Hebrew)
n. - ‮שליטה באמצעות ניהול מרכזי, ביורוקרטיה, שלטון מדכא ונוקשה של פקידים, משרדנות, ניירת‬

If you are unable to view some languages clearly, click here.