The Impact of Post Bureaucratic Administration on People Management

Bureaucracy refers to an organizational structure of systems in hierarchies which concentrates on central power. The centralized power enables the firm to control its staff through an autocratic leadership style whereby each employee is required to specialize in a particular field. Numerous changes were implemented in the workplace structure in the 20th century and have been dynamic, self-motivating and ever-changing. Management approaches, in this case, encourage people to express their intuitive and creative rationale. Management approaches in the post-bureaucratic era are seen as collaborative with the environment of the workplace such that success is determined by the management process that has a direct effect on individual employees. This paper discusses the impact of the post-bureaucratic administration approaches on people management.

One of the significant strengths of post–bureaucracies is the application of coercive control where the management shifts their power to staff members through retention of the corporate facilitated by the values of the company (Uhl-Bien and Marion 2009, p.640). Company values are crucial in laying out guidelines for how employees should conduct themselves in the workplace with the objective of coming up with innovations and improving production in the organization. ISE communication is a perfect example which enables the employees to engage in teamwork activities for purposes of sound decision making and change management. Coercive control can, therefore, be seen as one way of encouraging staff members to put their focus on the product and be responsible by being part of the organization’s success plan (Pollitt 2009, p.201).  According to Weber, bureaucracy and the coercive control employed by its systems and rules is the most appropriate method of management. The effectiveness of coercive control is proved through the example of Ritzer’s and Mc Donald model which is rational through the application of four fundamental strategies that is calculability, efficiency, control, and predictability. 

Political pressures have also been seen to affect staffs in various organizations. Staff members do minimal for the extraordinary success of the organization because they fear being held accountable in case anything goes wrong in the firm. Bureaucracies have therefore attempted to solve this problem by strategizing new systems that can bring change in the firm without being affected by external factors. Post bureaucracies soft power may also be applied in a firm to encourage the employees’ contribution through the development of new ideas and freedom of expression of their opinions (Terry 2015, p.46). Post bureaucracies operate using the soft power technique and which enhances openness in the firm in such a way that the staff members feel embraced allowing them to effectively contribute and get used to various changes in the organization. This kind of relationship can only be cultivated through effective communication between managers and the staff. Nevertheless, the use of soft power may be detrimental due to staff’s resistance. Essentially, this can be effectively managed through bureaucracies (Van 2014, p.380). Leadership based on soft power is more efficient for change and resistance management.

Another change approach in the post-bureaucratic era is the business-process re-engineering. It is focused on the achievement of higher organizational performances and efficiency through redesigning and rethinking (Terry 2015, p.46). The two processes are facilitated by soft domination which enables staff to develop flexible visions concerning the business environment. Nevertheless, this approach has become increasingly popular because about 70% of the change initiatives have not been successful because the staff fails to understand the process of implementation leading to unpleasing results.

Advocating for changes using inter-organizational fields, organizational processes, and platform identity is another effective change approach (Weber 2013, p.65). The firm identifies the problems and acknowledges the need for change in the organization. Platform identity refers to a situation where the organization influences the corporate culture of the firm to the employees to create a sense of belongingness. However, according to research employees gain their identity on their own depending on the organizational values. An example of organizational processes is when an electrical company introduces the concept of total quality management to help the staff members understand their work (Uhl-Bien and Marion 2009, p.640). This strategy allows a clear and active flow of information between the management and the staff members which leads to innovation. Inter-organizational fields are where certain individuals are centrally placed in the firm in a way that enables them to utilize their power to impact change in the organization. An example of this is where managers directly help the staff during changes to allow effective management of change resistance, making them productive.

Management of people and organizations requires smooth adaptation to changes, and therefore organizations can pick up on Taylorism which assumes the stability of organizations thus reflecting on the system based element of bureaucracy (Singh 2013, p.253). Most organizations are against Taylorism because it forces the firm to change its normal operation.  Nevertheless, organizations can manage changes through the strict bureaucratic control which improves lead time, is cost effective and ensures correct management and staff retention. In contrast, the delivery of innovations using the strict bureaucratic control, a soft method is utilized in post bureaucracy by working together with the stakeholders. In conclusion, post bureaucracies are excellent in innovation and impacting changes in organizations. Systematic administration may be successful in change delivery through the application of coercive control which can cultivate production and efficiency.

References

Pollitt, C., 2009. Bureaucracies remember post‐bureaucratic organizations forget? Public Administration, 87(2), pp.198-218.

Singh, P., 2013. Transforming traditional bureaucratic management practices by employing the Collegial Leadership Model of Emancipation. The International Business & Economics Research Journal (Online), 12(8), p.953.

Terry, L.D., 2015. The leadership of Public Bureaucracies: The Administrator as Conservator: The Administrator as Conservator. Routledge.

Uhl-Bien, M. and Marion, R., 2009. Complexity leadership in bureaucratic forms of organizing: A meso model. The Leadership Quarterly, 20(4), pp.631-650.

Van der Voet, J., 2014. The effectiveness and specificity of change management in a public organization: Transformational leadership and a bureaucratic organizational structure. European Management Journal, 32(3), pp.373-382.

Weber, M., 2013. From Max Weber: essays in sociology. Routledge.