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.
¶ … organizational decision making best explains decision making in an ideal-Typical Weberian bureaucracy?
In a classical Weberian bureaucracy, decisions are made in an impersonal manner. People mean very little, in terms of the functionality of the organization. Processes rather than people are important. In a classical Weberian model, even when the personnel within the bureaucratic structure might change, the organization would still remain equally efficient. Subordinates follow the directions of their superiors, but technical qualifications, rather than favoritism determines promotions. This could be called 'bounded rationality,' or rationally operating to achieve optimal outcomes within imposed constraints and the limited knowledge available.
'Following the rules' in a blind fashion can be disastrous, if the rules are not set up correctly. But in the Weberian model of rationality, given that the rules are rational, legal, "reliable and clear" this "allows the subordinate more independence...
Subordinates have more power in bureaucracies than in other governing structures because they are not reliant upon currying favor with their bosses to get ahead, and "ideally can challenge the decisions of their leaders by referring to the stated rules -- charisma becomes less important. As a result, bureaucratic systems can handle more complex operations than traditional systems" ("Bureaucracy (Weber)," Babson College, 2012). Actions are deemed rational if they lead to value for the actor, and, in this case the 'actor' is deemed to be the organization as a whole. In Weber's rationalist model, actors within organizations are not presumed to have their own interests; rather they follow rules in a rational fashion to bring the intended process to an end.
Within the Weberian model, there is no allowance for limited rationality. For example, one common criticism of the security apparatus of the United…
references, options, and outcomes, the influence of competing interests can create very different perceptions of what is rational.
Of course, it should be noted that Weber merely stated that bureaucracies pursued the best possible courses of rational actions for themselves, not for the world as a whole. But even that cannot fully explain why some organizations take actions that are profitable in the short-term (such as selling subprime loans) and fail to rationally anticipate likely negative long-term consequences that will harm the organization and cause it to implode because of the likely fall-out. Furthermore, decision-makers may not have optimal knowledge of 'the rules' and imperfectly follow them, causing the organization to behave irrationally in the absence of sufficient constraints (like laws on the banking industry).
Reference
"Bureaucracy (Weber)." Babson College. [27 Jul 2012]
http://faculty.babson.edu/krollag/org_site/encyclop/bureaucracy.html
Organization Decision Making Within an organization, there have to be many changes taking place at all times, without which the organization may stagnate and start to decline. These changes would have to be organization-wide, rather than small changes like changing the program, adding a new person, and so on. Some examples of organization-wide change are a change in the mission of the company, or a restructuring of operations, or maybe an
Organizational Decision-Making: Situational/Contextual Frameworks Different contexts call for different leadership approaches. For this reason, Snowden and Boone (2007) emphasize the importance of recognizing the context at a specific time before deciding what action or decision to take. As a guide, the authors developed the Cynefin framework, which categorizes the issues that leaders face into four contexts defined by the nature of the cause-and-effect relationship: simple, complicated, complex, and chaotic. This text
The dominant, goal-oriented person can focus on the ultimate objective, the influence-based person can examine the interpersonal dynamics of the decisions that must be made, the steady person can foster harmony and a positive atmosphere, and the conscientious person can stay on task in a reliable fashion. While clashing personalities can thwart reaching positive and goal-directed solutions, they can create a better solution and check the excesses of one
Decision Making Ethics is a philosophical term derived from the Greek word "ethos," meaning character or custom (Sims, 1994, p. 16). Ethics, therefore, is not just an ethereal concept belonging to the domain of philosophers and theologists, but a universal phenomenon that pervades the very functioning of individuals and society. Indeed, ethics can be said to be the guiding set of principles, based on which individual character, social and organizational custom
Decision making is a term that can be described as the process of choosing between alternatives and entails identification, development, and selection. Based on academic literature decision making and analysis can be widely divided into two schools of thoughts i.e. analytic and experiential or incremental decision making processes (Sipp & Carayannis, 2013, p.18). The analytic school of thought on decision making and analysis primarily focuses on problem definition and identification,
Organizational culture theory and the role and impact of both formal and informal groups on the functioning of modern day organizations. Organizational culture is the way organizations conducts its business transactions. It also refers to the different perspectives that a company sees things. An organization builds its own organizational culture through structure, history and the traditions of the company (Shafritz 2005). Theories of organizational culture suggest that culture gives an organization