Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
As far as the personal satisfactions of the individuals which are implied in the process are concerned, for the bureaucracy professional or the bureaucratic system they simply do not exist. Therefore, it can be stated that for bureaucracy the goal is a purely objective one, while for social entrepreneurship the subjective dimension is pretty strong.
Bureaucracy is supposed to make the overall system function in an efficient manner, social entrepreneurship is specifically oriented towards a certain organization. It is true that society as an overall is supposed to benefit from its initiatives, but its targets are smaller in size and oriented towards pragmatic unilateral goals
As far as bureaucracy is concerned, it has five main characteristics. The first one is that it functions according to official jurisdictional areas which are fixed and established in an official and immutable way. These areas are managed by fixed rules (that is laws and administrative regulation). One of the most relevant characteristics of the system is the principle of hierarchy. Its levels are organized according to super and sub-ordination criteria. The subordinated categories are controlled by the superior ones, which have more insight and also more authority (their authority is formally recognized and imposed, but is also based upon superior capacities of comprehension of the overall situation).
It is highly interesting to acknowledge the fact that the functioning of the bureaucratic system is based upon written documentation....
From this point-of-view, it could be stated that the bureaucratic system is a rigid one. However this rigidity contributes to the creation of an environment of stability.
The management of the bureaucratic office follows general rules. It must be underlined that these rules are more or less stable. At the same time, they are more or less exhaustive. The main implication is that they are easy to be learned. Reading between the lines we understand that these characteristics render the rules easy to be learned. Therefore, those individuals who wish to be part of the bureaucratic system of official participants need only to learn these rules and apply for a position in the area.
While this might sound easy, it must be underlined that the task is not an easy one. The office task are extremely specialized and this means that those wishing to attain these positions must be extremely trained. Once the position is obtained, the bureaucratic official will gain a relevant social esteem though his position, his qualities being recognized by the superior authorities.
Bibliography:
Mair, j., Robinson, J., Hockerts, K. (2006) Social Entrepreneurship pp1-13. NY Palgrave MacMillan
Michels, R. Democracy and the iron law of oligarchy (1966) Political parties: a sociological studies of the oligarchical tendencies of modern democracy, NY Free press
Shafritz, JM, Ott, JS; Jang, YS (2005) Classics of organization theory, Thomson
Bibliography:
Mair, j., Robinson, J., Hockerts, K. (2006) Social Entrepreneurship pp1-13. NY Palgrave MacMillan
Michels, R. Democracy and the iron law of oligarchy (1966) Political parties: a sociological studies of the oligarchical tendencies of modern democracy, NY Free press
Shafritz, JM, Ott, JS; Jang, YS (2005) Classics of organization theory, Thomson
Firms with what organisational patterns are more likely to acquire existing firms? In what stage of internationalisation is acquisition more likely? Such research should not assume that such decisions are always rational. It may be that irrational factors are important at times. For example, it might be that the rush to acquire businesses in Europe prior to 1992 and to acquire companies in Asia in the mid-1990s reflected a
The goal is approached through three distinct channels -- (1) a bottom up approach, focused on the individual administrator; (2) a top down approach focused on organizational culture, and (3) the approach to values from a functional and practical angle. The conclusions can easily be extrapolated to the totality of entities, public or private, to reveal how an incremental emphasis is being placed on culture, ideologies, reform and efficiency. The
The theory sees human organizational behaviors and conceptions culturally bound, rather than natural, unlike advocates of systems theory. Systems theory has been more influenced by sociology and linguistics than the natural sciences. Analyzing symbolic interpretations may be more useful in organizations serving diverse populations: if a public health organization wants to alleviate the prevalence of diabetes in an area, it is not enough to more effectively disseminate information through the
Classic of Organization Theory Classical theorists would incorporate Maslow's social science theory into an organization's culture fairly sparingly. Classical theorists were not as concerned with an organization's culture as they were its output and focus on commercialization. Therefore, it would deal less with the individual components of the members while formulating such a culture, and deal more with implementing the individual principles in a group effort in which all of the
Organization Theory and Behavior Gender and Values The development of values in modern day organizations, particularly those that represent the public sector, are becoming increasingly aligned with principles that are part of social science and primary social science theory. As such, many of these values represent a degree of mutability that is representative of the dynamic nature of social science in general. As Montgomery Van Wart denotes in Changing Public Sector Values,
" In other words, the conclusion is that women have a negative impact on all five organizational performance criteria -- personal achievements, accountability, team building, morale and customer service. A similar view is shared by Elton Mayo, who argues that women tend to talk too much among themselves, fail to become subordinate and as such distract the attention of the whole group, negatively impacting power of concentration, and consequently, performances