Classics of Organization Theory; How

Classics of Organization Theory; How Is Bureaucracy Difference From Democracy and Social Entrepreneurship

The purpose of the present paper is to analyze the bureaucracy phenomenon in the broader context of the organization theory field. The first part of the paper will deal with the differences between bureaucracy and democracy, the second will underline the differences between bureaucracy and social entrepreneurship, while the last part will be entirely dedicated to describing the characteristics of the phenomenon under discussion.

Speaking of the democracy phenomenon, it could be stated from the beginning that the state is the instrument through which society governs itself. Ideally, in a democratic environment, the state ought to work in the best interest of all the citizens. However, according to some voices, even in the case of the democratic system, things are somewhat different.

Despite the equality of rights, even in the case of a democratic society, there is still a small group of people which has more power than the majority. Some say that regardless of the political belonging of this group, it will eventually wish to impose its own power in the detriment of the majority. As far as the organizational matters are concerned, it must be underlined that unlike in the bureaucratic system. In the democratic system positions are not held for life. They are designed for only a limited amount of time and they are also revocable. This means that unlike the bureaucratic system which is considered, at least officially impeccable, the political democratic one is subject to errors and this errors are sanctioned by the wide audience. While the bureaucratic system is a closed one, in the sense that the various hierarchical levels are evaluated by those superior to them, the political democratic class is judged, evaluated and sanctioned by the mass of citizens in the name of which it is ruling. Furthermore, while the parties are ideological representatives of certain classes, the bureaucratic system is "neutral," in the sense that it is meant to serve everybody's interest in a balanced manner which helps the overall social and political mechanism function.

As far as bureaucracy and the social entrepreneurship phenomenon are concerned, there are a lot of differences to be underlined. While bureaucracy is an instrument which is supposed to serve the best functioning of society involving all the citizens through the necessities which the political system imposes, social entrepreneurship is oriented towards more specific goals.

Right from the beginning one must underline that while the characteristics of bureaucracy are fixed and known to almost everybody (this knowledge being derived from the contact which often the regular citizen is compelled to have with the bureaucratic system), the area of social entrepreneurship is relatively new. The large number of definitions which try to grasp its essence it one of the arguments which support this thesis. Going deeper with the interpretation, it could be said that while bureaucracy is already consolidated phenomenon, social entrepreneurship is in its development phase.

Bureaucracy is supposed to make the social system work, and this is its supreme goal. 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. The files are recorded and preserved in their initial form. 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.