Organizational theory and management principles

Life Cycle of Organizations

Anthony Downs on the life cycle of bureaus: comparison of old and new organizations and state of organizations at present

In the book, "Inside Bureaucracy," author and political theorist Anthony Downs introduced, analyzed, and discussed the concept known as the "life cycle of bureaus." This concept was conceptualized to illustrate the nature and dynamics of government agencies and institutions, which displayed an altogether different culture compared to private or non-government organizations. From his study of government bureaus, Down presented the argument that,

As a bureau grows older, the number and proportion of administrative officials therein tends to rise. If a bureau experiences a period of relative stability in total size following a period of rapid growth, the average age of its members tends to rise as the bureau grows older. This tends to increase the influence of conservers in the bureau, for many officials of other types are likely to become conservers as they grow older.

This assertion from the author demonstrated the nature of bureaus, which tend to be initially developmental and over time, conservative. Its later development into being a conservative organization is dependent on the people within these bureaus, people who have grown with the bureau. In fact, it can be construed that Downs wanted to illustrate government bureaus as organizations wholly dependent not on its regulations and structure, but the people who are within these structures. The culture, processes, and even the structures within bureaus are dependent on the people who make them up (bureaus).

What made Downs' analysis significant and interesting is that he did not only attempt to illustrate and analyze the life cycle of bureaus, but he also tried to determine the "character" or nature of the people who comprise these bureaus. Downs believed that because it is the people who make up the culture, processes, and structures of bureaus and that bureaus have a distinct nature from other organization, then the people composing them also have a distinct nature. In the same way that he categorized bureaus as initially developmental and eventually conservative, Downs also posited that 'bureau people' have a distinct nature, which is also initially development and eventually conservative.

The life cycle of bureaus is divided into various stages: (1) genesis or the emergence of the bureau; (2) struggle for autonomy; (3) growth of the bureau; (4) deceleration; and (5) aging. After aging, there is also another stage, which is the "death" of the bureau. However, this last stage was not included as part of the bureau's life cycle, because, as Downs contended, a bureau 'does not voluntarily' dissolve itself. This is but logical, for the people who make up the bureau would not want to be dissolved as an organization. In order for the people to survive, the bureau must also survive, and vice versa.

In the first stage of the life cycle, the bureau and its people are moving towards development, which eventually leads to identity-seeking behavior, as the people try to create a distinction that will differentiate them from other organizations and bureaus. Once the members learn to create the identity of their bureau, they will then proceed towards growth. Growth involves the creation of processes and structures that will also be distinct and unique to the bureau. Growth is the most crucial stage, for it ultimately determines the bureau for what it is and what it will be in the future. Moreover, growth is crucial stage in that it is the point wherein the members' character and nature are reinforced. Unfortunately, what follows growth is a period of stagnation, immediately followed by deceleration. As the bureau reaches the "aging" stage, it stops developing and retains the characteristic it was identified with during the growth stage.

From Downs' analysis and discussion of the life cycle of bureaus, it is apparent that bureaus tend to be viewed as "old" organizations, in the sense that they cease to develop further once they reach the aging stage. Bureaus remain old because they do not dissolve or 'die'; thus, they survive, yet do not grow with time anymore.

When compared to new organizations, old organizations such as bureaus have advantages as well as disadvantages over them. One of the known advantages of being an old organization is that it has a unique nature and character. Therefore, people would not have any difficulty in knowing the bureau and identifying its function as an organization. Another advantage of being an old and aging organization is that the same structures, processes, and culture is conserved, thereby tasks and activities are accomplished efficiently (if the bureau indeed works efficiently).

A disadvantage of being an old and aging organization is that it ceases to keep up with the changes that occur in the external environment of the bureau. An aging and old organization may fail to keep up with the technological changes influencing organizations nowadays. New organizations, moreover, are more flexible and mobile, which makes the processes and structures within it as dynamic or ever-changing. In effect, new organizations grow because they are exposed to various organizational arrangements and structures, thereby making them more receptive to change, inducing development and more importantly, improvement.

Comparing Downs' life cycle of bureaus to the life cycle of organizations nowadays, a remarkable difference emerges. According to Downs, "As a bureau grows older, the number and proportion of administrative officials therein tends to rise," and " ... A bureau experiences a period of relative stability in total size following a period of rapid growth, the average age of its members tends to rise as the bureau grows older." Both observations and arguments contradict the life-cycle model of organizations at present. Recent studies on organizations showed that their life cycle is best summed up as follows: "As organizations mature, they tend to become larger, more formalized, and more differentiated (fragmented)" (Kreitner, 1995:508).

This life-cycle model of new organizations is developing and is growing bigger as organizations develop. Bureaus, meanwhile, tend to shrink over time because the lack or absence of development would mean the decreasing number of people needed to accomplish the tasks and activities given to the bureau. And with a shrinking number of members, bureau members resort to multi-tasking, in order to accomplish tasks without needing more members than they really need or can afford to have. Bureaus that have reached the aging stage are at a disadvantage because even though they do not wish or want to dissolve the organization, it would simply cease to exist, because it would no longer have a function considered important and significant to the people.