organisations and the behaviour of the bureaucrats within them.
We saw earlier how Weber used a series of models of authority to
explain the range of social possibilities and to explain the internal
logic of these variations (see Chapter 3). These ‘ideal-type’ models are
often a useful analytical device – his model of ‘bureaucracy’ is very
much of this kind.
Weber (Gerth and Mills, 1948: Ch. VIII) convincingly described
some of the key characteristics of bureaucracy (literally government
by offices) (Box 8.2), which he said ‘compares with other organisa-
tions exactly as does the machine with non-mechanical means of
production’.BOX 8.2 WEBER’S CHARACTERISTICS OF
BUREAUCRACY
Bureaucracy may have originated in the needs of empires for
the efficient administration of huge territories. However, it has
flourished in recent times in meeting the needs of massive industrial
populations, all of whom need to be treated alike in the name of
democracy. Weber suggests such organisations are characteristic of a
modern ‘rational–legal’ social order. They appear to be suited to
making rational decisions on behalf of society. What, however, does
‘rational’ mean in this context, and do such organisations fulfil this
role in fact?218 POLICIES
(a) Fixed and Official Jurisdictional Areas – official ‘duties’, stable
rules, methodically carried out (specialisation)
(b) Official Hierarchy – pyramid of officials each reporting up to level
above (integration)
(c) Use of Files – to create an ‘organisational memory’
(d) Official Activity as Full-time Work – no conflict between private
and public interests (dedication)
(e) Expert Training of Officials – technical competence and esprit de
corps
(f) Corpus of Rules – leading to predictability of behaviour
(Weber, in Gerth and Mills, 1948)