Principles of Bureaucratic Theory
1. Job Specialization
Jobs are divided into simple, routine, and fixed categories based on competence and functional specialization.
2. Authority Hierarchy
Officers are organized in a hierarchy in which higher officers control lower position holders, i.e., superiors control subordinates and the performance of subordinates and lower staff can be monitored and controlled.
3. Formal Selection
All organizational members are selected on the basis of technical qualifications and competence demonstrated through training, education, or formal examination.
4. Formal Rules and Regulations
To ensure uniformity and regulate the actions of employees, managers must depend heavily upon formal organizational rules and regulations. Thus, rule of law leads to impersonality in interpersonal relations.
5. Impersonality
Rules and controls are applied uniformly, avoiding involvement with personalities and personal preferences of employees. Nepotism and favoritism are not preferred.
Limitations of Bureaucratic Theory
1. Informal Relationships Are Not Considered
The theory does not consider informal relationships between individuals working in organizations.
2. Outdated System
Its system of control and authority is outdated and cannot work effectively in a rapidly changing environment.
3. Inadequate Means
Bureaucratic theory does not possess adequate means for resolving differences and conflicts arising between functional groups.
Hawthorne Experiment / Elton Mayo’s Contribution to Management
In 1927, a group of researchers led by Elton Mayo and Fritz Roethlisberger of the Harvard Business School were invited to conduct studies at the Hawthorne Works of Western Electric Company, Chicago. The experiment lasted until 1932.
The Hawthorne Experiments revealed that employee productivity is not only a function of physical working conditions and wages. Productivity depends heavily on employee satisfaction in the work situation.
Mayo concluded that logical factors were far less important than emotional factors in determining productivity efficiency. Among all human factors influencing employee behavior, the most powerful were those arising from workers’ participation in social groups.
Thus, work arrangements must satisfy not only the objective requirements of production but also the subjective requirement of social satisfaction at the workplace.
The Hawthorne Experiment consists of four parts:
1. Illumination Experiment
This experiment was conducted to establish the relationship between output and illumination. When the intensity of light was increased, output also increased. Output continued to rise even when illumination was gradually reduced to normal levels.
It was concluded that there was no consistent relationship between output and illumination. Some other factors were influencing productivity.
2. Relay Assembly Test Room Experiment
This phase aimed to study not only illumination but also factors such as length of working hours, rest intervals, and other physical conditions.
A small homogeneous group of six girls was formed. They worked in an informal atmosphere under the supervision of a researcher. Productivity and morale increased considerably during the experiment.
Even when all improvements were withdrawn and original working conditions were restored, productivity remained high.
The researchers concluded that socio-psychological factors such as:
were the key reasons for increased productivity.
3. Mass Interview Programme
The objective of this programme was to study employees’ attitudes and understand the meaning their “working situation” had for them.
A large number of workers were interviewed regarding their opinions about work, working conditions, and supervision. Initially, direct questioning was used, but responses were guarded.
Later, an indirect approach was adopted where interviewers simply listened. This confirmed the importance of social factors in the overall work environment.
4. Bank Wiring Test Room Experiment
This experiment was conducted by Roethlisberger and Dickson to study social groups and factors restricting output.
A group of 14 workers was observed under normal working conditions. After the experiment, their production records were compared with earlier records.
It was found that the group developed its own production norms, which were lower than management standards. Workers producing more than group norms were isolated, harassed, or punished by the group.
As a result, workers deliberately restricted output, defeating the incentive system.