Disadvantages Of Bureaucracy

There exist mixed opinions and perceptions about bureaucracy, and is application in the study of the modern-day organizations. While some feel that bureaucracy is suitable for a majority of 21st century organizations, others have the perception that it is unfit for these organizations. Those who maintain that bureaucracy is appropriate for modern organizations contend that it reinforces employee commitment, motivation, and trust, while easing tension emanating from conflict of interests as employees strive to accomplish their routine tasks. On the other hand, those opposing such proponents argue that bureaucracy is characterized by employee alienation, low commitment levels, and too much inflexibility, making it unsuitable for the rapidly changing

For this reason, many of them are embracing the concept of decision decentralization, whereby decision-making responsibilities are dispersed or distributed among executives and representatives through delegation. Bureaucracy on it its side is a system that advocates that most important decision should be made top officials, with no involvement of elected representatives (Sørensen, 1984). It implies that, while decentralized organization structures are characterized by better, speedier and more accurate decisions, the decisions made on a bureaucratic basis are slower and less accurate. This owes to the fact that bureaucracy is characterized by fixed documented rules, hierarchical authority offices, and rigid labor division as well as extended document use, according to Gartner and Katz (1988) and Weber (1997). These are characteristics that hamper quick decisions needed in keeping the pace with the revolutionary administrative and corporate transformations being witnessed in the competitive present-day world. Braverman (1998) records that decentralization in the modern corporations emerged from the need to achieve streamlined operations in massive sub-corporations within the corporations that uphold a pyramiding

The relationships between the executive officials and their juniors in an organization that adopts a bureaucratic system of leadership in usually impersonal. Although impersonality of bureaucracy is praised as important in promoting equality by some scholars, it is a bureaucratic characteristic that cause infuriation in organizations as individual treatment of people is overridden by generalization, something that Gajduschek (2003) attests to. Noteworthy, offended employees are ultimately unproductive employees. Bureaucracies are mostly impersonal employers, which can offend workers. According to Byrkjeflot and Du Gay (2005), impersonality is one of the practices that fundamentally define bureaucracy, besides anachronism, authoritarianism, formality and hierarchy all of which inharmonious or out of balance. Indeed, the two authors assert that the cure for these objectionable practices that characterize bureaucracy is the preferment of alternative criteria such as flexibility and informality as well as individual empowerment. This is an indication that, as far are the study labor force motivation in contemporary organizations is concerned, bureaucracy is not a feasible approach. Reiterating on the UK Police Force example, Berry (2010) maintains that reduction of unnecessary bureaucracy is the