Analysis of Yang's bureaucracy versus high performance work systems

High Performance Organization

The intent of this analysis is to evaluate the peer-reviewed article Bureaucracy vs. high performance: Work reorganization in the 1990s (Yang, 2008) including a description of the issues being studied, definition of the research questions, description of theories used, hypotheses, research design and short summary of findings.

Description of Issues Studied

The objective of this study is to evaluate the components of bureaucratic vs. high performance work systems, specifically focusing on the factors of degree of workplace formalization, level of hierarchy, number of departmentalization as the bureaucratic factors. The high performance factors included in the analysis include teamwork, skill enhancements and job autonomy. Additional high performance factors include innovative pay structures that were initially believed to be part of high performance work systems yet throughout the analysis were proven not to be. The analysis also indicates that high performance teams will seek to emulate high performance teams in their immediate areas of influence, with foreign market competitors being a powerful galvanizing force in creating a more unified work group that more willingly participated in training and development programs (Yang, 2008).

Research Question

The researcher looks to answer the questions of what the cultural factors that contribute most and least to high performance systems, specifically looking at the major differences between bureaucracies and high performance work systems. The second research question centers on how the adoption of systems of operation varies by bureaucracies vs. high performance work systems.

Description of Theories Used

The researcher and author concentrates on theories that will help to define the orthogonal nature of bureaucratic vs. high performance team behaviors. Using a series of theories to define the unique differences between and within groups on performance dimensions, the author relies heavily on the concept of mimetic isomorphism, institutional theories, economies of scale, and an entire foundation of theories dedicated to defining how organizational structure is dictated by the workplace size and speed of learning (Yang, 2008). The collection of theories provided in the analysis are used for defining the unique attributes or characteristics of bureaucratic vs. high performance teams, and the cultures necessary to nurture the former.

Hypotheses

The hypotheses for this study include the following (Yang, 2008):

H1. Bureaucratic organizations are indicated by the level of hierarchy, the lateral departmentalization, and workplace formalization.

H2. High performance work systems are indicated by teamwork, skill upgrading worker empowerment programs, and performance-based pay structures.

H3. The higher the domestic market competition, the more likely the organization use of high performance organizational practices.

H4. The higher the international market competition, the more likely the organization use of high performance organizational practices.

H5. The higher the domestic market competition, the less likely the organizations adopt bureaucratic structure.

H6. The higher the international market competition, the less likely the organizations adopt bureaucratic structure.

H7. The higher the percentage of organizations adopting bureaucratic structures in an industry, the more likely the organizations adopt bureaucratic structures in the same industry.

H8. The higher the percentage of other organizations adopting high performance work practices in an industry, the more likely the organizations adopt high performance work practices in the same industry.

Findings

The findings are what one would suspect form the series of hypotheses and research design namely a bureaucratic organization suffocates even the least levels of high performance systems, and doesn't let up until any element of nonconformity is gone. The higher the level of teamwork, training, job autonomy and implied transformational leadership, the greater the level of job satisfaction and corresponding performance gains of a team. The lessons learned indicate that an organization will often model itself on successful peer companies or enterprise, hence the heavy reliance on structural isomorphism and theories that support this level of analysis and associative dimensionality of organizational performance. Further, the studies' results also show that when an organization is faced with uncertainty its reliance more on mimicry and emulation is evident in organizations with weak leaders. It is implied from the analysis that a transformational leader will be able to selectively guide an organization to its objectives through the use of selective structural isomorphism. Leaders who can attain this level of performance can often navigate their teams to higher performance as a result.