© Polity Press 2013
This file should be used solely for the purpose of review and must not be otherwise
stored, duplicated, copied or sold
CHAPTER COMMENTARY
The aim of this chapter is to introduce the main principles of organization and to examine
both formal and informal patterns of association.
An organization, a large impersonal group of people set up to achieve specific objectives, is
an increasingly familiar form in contemporary society. Organizations loom large from cradle
to grave and much of social life depends on the smooth activity of organizations (such as
hospitals, educational institutions). It is a mixed blessing, as organization bestows increased
predictability but inexorably draws more and more of our lives into its web (more and more
demands are made on us by its needs) and infringes our personal freedom.
Having set the scene, the text moves on to examine the work of two of the most currently
influential theorists, Weber and Foucault. Central to the former’s work is bureaucracy, or
rule by officials. The main features of Weber’s ideal type are laid out in Classic Studies Box
19.1, namely hierarchy, written rules, salaried posts, separation between post and person
and removal from direct control of the means of production. Weber’s emphasis upon
formal relations within organizations is contrasted with Blau’s study of informal relations in
a government agency. This shows that everyday working practices ran counter to written
protocols, because loyalty to social group overrode formal reporting links. Such informal
practices are commonplace even in the most apparently rigid organizations, offering both an
aid and encumbrance to that organization’s activities. The shortcomings of bureaucracy are
further developed with reference to the work of Merton and also Burns and Stalker.
Merton’s interest in the dysfunctions of bureaucracy concentrated on ways in which the
very principles of bureaucratic organization could ultimately become self-defeating. Burns
and Stalker’s famous distinction between mechanistic and organic organizations makes the
argument that structures are at least partly a function of product market situation.
The next sub-section section contrasts bureaucracy and democracy as ideal-types. The text
points out the extent to which personal information about citizens is collected and stored.
The spectre of Orwell’s ‘Big Brother’ is invoked, and there is an overview of the recent
debate in the UK about the introduction of identity cards. Such worries have long
preoccupied those mistrustful of bureaucracy’s anti-democratic tendencies. Counted among
this group are both Weber and his student Michels, who concluded that these tendencies
amounted to an iron law of oligarchy in all modern societies. The text observes that the
tension between these two phenomena is an ongoing one and that those at the top do not
165
always have as much control as it might be believed. Using Your Sociological Imagination
Box 19.1, showing the gates of Auschwitz, assesses Bauman’s judgement upon the
Holocaust as the quintessential expression of bureaucratic organization. It showcases Paul
du Gay’s important defence of bureaucracy, in which he argues that its central principle,
namely that of equal treatment for all, is profoundly ethical and humanist and his argument
(against Bauman) that the Holocaust was a distortion of bureaucratic principles.
Attention is drawn to the physical characteristics of organizations and the way that buildings
become symbols of organization. This leads on to a discussion of Foucault (a Classic Study
here), who pointed out the architectural reality of Weber’s abstract ideas. Above all,
however, Foucault is known for his emphasis on surveillance within organizations. The need
for effective supervision of labour often leads to groups of workers operating in open spaces
in direct sight of superiors. Alternatively (or additionally) surveillance can involve files of
information that record the performance of those within the organization. Finally, Foucault
notes the need for activities to be ‘coordinated in time and space’ through timetabling and
regularized work patterns. Foucault’s ideas came together in his studies of prisons; he came
to feel that all organizations were to some extent based on the logic of the prison. Foucault
drew on Jeremy Bentham’s concept of the Panopticon, a prison design where the prisoners
could be seen at all times by the guards, who themselves remained behind blinds. Links are
made back to the previous debate about bureaucracy by pointing out that even in a
surveillance society there is considerable scope for resistance, resentment and revolt.
Authority does not invariably triumph.
The next section does full justice to transnational organizations – ‘organizations that span
the world’. These are of two types, international governmental organizations (IGOs) and
international non-governmental organizations (INGOs). Short summaries of each type are
presented.
The commentary moves on to cover economic organizations, namely those that operate
within capitalism. The reader gets a micro-primer in economic history, as the text traces the
emergence of large business corporations. In the face of this increasing industrial
concentration, the entrepreneur continues to persist and prosper within small and medium-
sized enterprises. However the large corporations will always have the power of monopoly
or, more commonly, oligopoly. These features of contemporary capitalism are put in
historical context with an overview of three stages or types of economic organization –
family capitalism, managerial capitalism, and welfare capitalism. On top of this is the
emergence of institutional capitalism.
Back in the contemporary world, the focus is on the international division of labour and
Perlmutter’s three types of transnational corporation: ethnocentric, polycentric and
geocentric. Such is the scale of these bodies that they can ‘plan on a global scale’ using four
webs – the Global Cultural Bazaar, the Global Shopping Mall, the Global Workplace and the
Global Financial Network. It is the ability to utilize these four webs that differentiates the
large corporations of the early twentieth century from those of the early twenty-first.
Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is ‘the ways in which a business seeks to align its
values and behaviour with those of its various stakeholders’ (Mallin 2009: 1). Given that the
latter may include government, suppliers, customers, employees and campaigning interest
groups, this is not an easy task, as their diverse values and behaviour may be in conflict. CSR
is part of the attempt to create a sustainable business model over the longer term by
improving relationships with key stakeholders.
Organizations and Networks
166
At this point the discussion turns to gender and explores the literature that has identified
organizational forms as inherently inimical to women. In this view, it is either that there are
not enough women in positions of power within organizations, or more fundamentally, that
such structures will remain male by their very nature. Rosabeth Moss Kanter’s contribution
is foregrounded, and then counterposed to that of Kathy Ferguson.
The next section focuses on alternatives to the hierarchical bureaucratic model of
organization. It examines a number of features of Japanese companies which make them
different from Weber’s ideal type. These are:
(a) bottom-up decision-making through suggestion schemes and quality circles;
(b) reduced specialization through job rotation and broader training;
(c) job security and payment in accordance with seniority;
(d) group-oriented production in cooperative teams;
(e) the merger of work and private lives, through company uniforms, songs and
leisure activities.
Such increased employee involvement can lead to greater commitment and effectiveness.
Global Society Box 19.1 looks at the changing face of McDonalds fast food stores following a
fall in sales.
Given the success of parts of the Japanese approach, the text observes the influence of
Japanese ideas on two recent innovations in Western management theory, namely human
resource management (HRM) and corporate culture. Brief portraits of these practices are
provided and both are seen as supportive of management, helping forms to better organise
their affairs. However, in recent years a body of work known as critical management
studies has challenged such conformist positions. CMS calls into question the neutrality of
currently dominant management training methods and courses, taking an essentially
conflict theoretical position. A second recent perspective is actor-network theory which
emerged from sociological studies of scientific practice. ANT tries to bring in non-human
actors to the study of organizations and networks, what its advocates call ‘the missing
masses’. Machines, buildings, documents and other ‘artefacts’ are taken into ANT accounts
of the operation of organizations and the suggestion that people may not be the central
part of such accounts has been particularly controversial.
The next section on networks documents the way that the effects of information technology
are modifying Foucault’s view of organizations as physically located in space. Drawing on
Castells’s concept of the network society and the network enterprise, the text uses
Benetton as an example of a networked business operation. The chapter closes with a topic
that has come to prominence, namely the whole well of research dealing with social capital,
not initiated but certainly energized by Putnam’s Bowling Alone which reaches pessimistic
conclusions about the impact of mass media. However, the chapter closes on a more
optimistic note, rehearsing some recent empirical research which may suggest not the
decline but simply the reinvention of community in a global and digital age.
167
TEACHING TOPICS
1. Formality and informality in organizations
The aim here is to cover the issue raised in the section on ‘Organizations’. The emphasis is
on understanding what bureaucracy involves, and appreciating its potential worth as well as
its dangers.
2. Foucault, surveillance and organizations
This topic is drawn from the material dealing with Foucault within ‘Organizations’. There are
two specific aims here: first, to draw attention to the influential debate about surveillance in
organizations, and, second, to deal with the issues of time and space which it raises, and
which are integral to the Giddens's approach.
3. Bureaucracy and after
This aims to pull together a wide range of narratives about ‘new’ forms of organization that
have come into being to rectify the faults of traditional or ‘bureaucratic’ structures. It also
offers an opportunity to assess the extent and nature of organizational change in the
contemporary world.
ACTIVITIES
Activity 1: Formality and informality in organizations
A. Read pages 828-32 of Sociology including Box 19.1 ‘Defending bureaucracy’ on Bauman
and du Gay. Then look at the following passage:
BUREAUCRACY. The word conjures up images that range from inability to get
anything done, to fat cats abusing power. It is now considered almost heretical to
have any business structure that remotely resembles a bureaucracy. But I believe
that bureaucracy still has a place in today’s organisation …
The rules of the bureaucratic organisation were devised to make appointments and
promotions on the basis of a candidate’s ability to do the job at a time when
nepotism was the norm. However the increasing importance of customer service
for many organisations means that the bureaucratic structure has come to be
regarded as, at best, inadequate and, at worst, debilitating. But is this really so?
There are several management techniques available that offer to monitor and
control customer service. Three areas, in particular, use similar methods to those
recommended for bureaucracy.
Quality assurance, BS 5750, ISO 9000 and Investors in People are all examples of
systems set up to guarantee that procedures are carried out to agreed
specifications. Most involve the creation of a network of checks and balances to
ensure compliance with the expectations of stakeholders. One has to ask how this
kind of system differs from the rule-based system defined by Weber: both involve a
set of exhaustive rules to cover every situation, and from which employees can
learn.
Organizations and Networks
168
There will be many proponents of ‘quality’ systems who are keen to stress the
differences between their systems and bureaucracy. But the fact remains that both
systems seek compliance from, and the close monitoring of, employees’ work.
Quality systems are comparatively new, but there are already examples of
employees following procedures that have not changed in accordance with
customer needs. ‘Quality’ people will argue that the integrity of the quality
procedure is still intact and that the problem lies with those who administer the
quality procedures. Weber could say the same for his bureaucratic model.
(Mike Healy, ‘Max Weber’s comeback, wearing topical hats’, People Management,
11 Jan. 1996)
1. Based on a reading both of the text and the passage, think about ways in which
bureaucratic rules and procedures could be regarded as both help and hindrance.
2. Try to recall situations when you have been either the victim or the beneficiary of
bureaucratic organization.
B. Now read the following extracts from Blau’s classic account of informal practices in an
employment agency:
The receptionists were responsible for screening clients. They had a list of all
occupations for which job openings were currently available. Clients in these
occupations were told by the receptionist to wait for an interview; the others were
sent home and given a date for a reappointment. This was not a pleasant task. The
receptionist had to tell many clients, some of whom needed a job desperately, that
they could not be helped on a certain day.
Rules governed the ‘due-date’ procedure, that is, the reappointment date that
receptionists had to give to applicants who could not be referred to a job. … All five
receptionists interpreted this procedure liberally. They exercised discretion,
frequently giving earlier due dates than specified, and occasionally seating a client
for an interview who should have been sent home …
The receptionists’ liberal interpretation of the due-date procedure did not interfere
with operations directly. … The supervisor made allowances for clerical discretion
because it contributed to work satisfaction without disrupting those operations for
which he was responsible.
However, the discretion of receptionists had the result that more clients than could
be handled came to department X and that applicants did not receive equitable
treatment. It was consequently dysfunctional for the regulation of the flow of
applicants and for their impartial treatment.
(Peter Blau, The Dynamics of Bureaucracy, rev. edn, Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 1963, pp. 28–31)
1. Reflect on your reactions to the passage. Would your views change if you placed yourself
in the position of (a) a receptionist; (b) a manager; (c) a client?
2. Think about the relationship in organizations between process and product. If it is
necessary to have strictly observed codes of conduct in order to prevent, for instance,
racial discrimination or sexual harassment, do the ends justify the means?
169
3. Now turn your mind to your own organization, which is in this case a school, college or
university. On your own or in groups try to identify the main rules and procedures which
govern your activities and those of your tutors.
Activity 2: Foucault, surveillance and organizations
A. Read pages 832-4 and Foucault’s boxed Classic Study 19.2 on pages 835-6, then
consider the following passage:
The character of disciplinary space, according to Foucault, derives primarily not
from the association of an organization with a specific piece of territory but from
the farming of space. Lines, columns, measured walled intervals are its
distinguishing features. It is not any particular part of the building that matters, but
its overall relational form. The classroom exemplifies this phenomenon. In the
eighteenth century, in France and elsewhere, classes come to be divided internally
into clearly delimited rows, externally separated by a connecting system of
corridors. These are curricular as well as spatial divisions. Individuals move through
such partitions not only in the course of the day but also during their educational
careers …
Discipline depends upon the calculative division of time as well as space. The
monastery, after all, was one of the first places in which the day was temporally
regulated in a precise and ordered fashion. The religious orders were the masters of
the methodical control of time, and their influence, diffuse or more direct, was felt
everywhere …
The Gobelins school was one instance of a general trend in eighteenth-century
education, in Foucault’s words an expression of a ‘new technique for taking charge
of the time of individual existences’. … Some seventy years after the school was set
up, a new type of training was initiated for the apprentices; it was first of all
complementary to the existing modes of procedure. Unlike those modes of
procedure, it was based on the careful serial arrangement of time. The children
attended the school for two hours a day. Classes were divided according to ability
and previous experience. Allotted tasks were carried out in a regular fashion,
appraised by the teacher and the most able rewarded. Progression between classes
was governed by the results of tests administered to all pupils. Day-to-day
behaviour was recorded in a book kept by teachers and their assistants; it was
periodically looked at by an inspector.
(Anthony Giddens, The Constitution of Society, Cambridge: Polity, 1984, pp. 147–9)
1. Once again, gauge your own reactions to this portrait of organization. Decide whether
you feel it is oppressive and regimented, or efficient and effective.
2. With reference to the organization of your own course of study, make notes on the ways
in which timing and spacing come into play inside the institution. Try to evaluate (in a
constructive way!) how effectively this operates.
B. Now look at this extract:
Though modern surveillance originated in specific institutions such as the army, the
corporation, and the government department, it has grown to touch all areas of
Organizations and Networks
170
life. This was brought home to me personally during a recent move from Britain to
Canada. My family and I could not fully participate in Canadian society until our
details had been transferred into a number of databases. This began on arrival at
Toronto International Airport, as the travel-tired family lined up at Employment and
Immigration Control. Details had to be keyed into the computer before we could
continue to our destination in Kingston, Ontario.
No sooner were we installed in Kingston than we had to obtain health care cards,
Social Insurance Numbers, bank cards and a university staff card, each of which
relates to personal details stored in a computer database. We could not be
employed, acquire medical or accident coverage, or obtain money without these.
However much we like cycling, it is hard to get around without a car, so we had to
get drivers’ licences, which again link our records by computer. Surprisingly soon
after arriving, we started receiving ‘personal’ advertising mail which indicated once
more that yet other computers contained data about us, gleaned from the
telephone company, which also lists – and sells – essential facts about us. Other
agencies than the phone company do just the same.
As soon as we began the process of buying a house, the quest for electronic
verification intensified. Mortgage companies demanded details of the crucial Social
Insurance Number (which would reveal immediately whether we were bona fide
citizens, permanent residents or temporary workers) because such financial
transactions are of interest to the tax authorities. Equipping ourselves with a
cooking stove, washing machine and fridge involved similar proof of (credit-)
worthiness in terms of bankcard and credit-card numbers. As a university professor,
I find myself in the relatively privileged position of either possessing the right
number of sequences to unlock these electronic doors or of being able to explain
that things will soon be in place. But the same processes are clearly experienced in
quite different ways by those lacking access to the appropriate plastic cards or
numbers.
(David Lyon, The Electronic Eye, Cambridge: Polity, 1994, pp. 5–6)
1. Make a list of all the objects you have with you which provide identification or access to
some important resource. Consider your feelings in relation to them. Does their
existence provide you with reassurance or anxiety?
2. Make a list of as many social situations you can think of where some form of surveillance
is involved. Some possibilities are:
• a ‘neighbourhood watch’ patrol
• closed circuit camera outside a sports stadium
• the logging of the visits you make to internet sites
• baby-sitting
Activity 3: Bureaucracy and after
A. Read pages 845-8 of the text. Make careful notes on the main features of the new
management practices and how they differ from bureaucratic ones.
B. Do some research to find out more about how a Japanese-style factory actually operates.
Look for features that remind you of Weber’s ideal-type. How much room is there for the
sort of informality described by Blau earlier in the chapter?
171
REFLECTION & DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
Formality and informality in organizations
If bureaucracy is so powerful, why do workers so often find scope for informal
practices?
Can you think of situations where it is to your advantage to be dealt with in a
rigidly bureaucratic manner?
What did Merton mean when he wrote of bureaucracy becoming ‘dysfunctional’?
Foucault, surveillance and organization
Is surveillance a problem if you have nothing to hide?
Can a modern society operate without the organization of time and space?
Would it still be possible to live in society without forms of identification?
Bureaucracy and after
Is there something inherently male about large organizations or do they just need more
women in them?
Are ideas about corporate culture any less rigid than the administering of bureaucratic
rules?
Would it be wise to run a whole economy on the principles of making French bread?
ESSAY QUESTIONS
1. Given that bureaucracies seem so singularly unloved, why do they continue to exist in
contemporary societies?
2. Assess the relationship between the work of Max Weber and Michel Foucault in their
approaches to organization.
3. Explain and evaluate Manuel Castells’s claim that the ‘network enterprise’ is the
organizational form best suited to a global information economy.
MAKING CONNECTIONS
Formality and informality in organizations
The discussion of Blau’s work in this context would be an excellent way into exploring the
material on social interactions and ‘front region, back region’ in Chapter 8. Both extracts
concern the organization of work activities and thus they can usefully be read in conjunction
with the material from Chapter 7.
Foucault, surveillance and organizations
The structuring of time and space in Foucault’s work can be further developed through
recourse to the discussion of space and time in Chapter 3. The emphasis on the disciplinary
character of organization might usefully be combined with material on prisons and
punishment in Chapter 21. The more ambitious might want to explore parallels between
Organizations and Networks
172
Lyon’s comments on electronic data and the ‘information age’ concept covered in Chapter
4.
Bureaucracy and after
The recent trends in organizational structures could be tied into labour market flexibility
(Chapter 7) or any of the treatments of global forces that recur throughout the book. Barbie
appears as a cultural symptom of globalization in Chapter 4. For the more ambitious the
arguments about the persistence of face to face working arrangements might be tied back
to the treatment of social interaction in Chapter 8.
SAMPLE SESSION
Formality and informality in organizations
Aims: To introduce the concept of bureaucracy and to assess the applicability of Weber’s
ideal type in organizational situations.
Outcome: By the end of the session students will be able to:
1. List the characteristics of a Weberian ideal-type bureaucracy.
2. Distinguish between formal and informal relations.
3. Apply theories of organization to empirical case studies.
Preparatory tasks
Read the relevant sections of Sociology. Then complete Tasks A1 and A2.
Classroom tasks
1. Tutor to write up features of bureaucracy from Sociology. List to remain on
board/flipchart throughout the session. (5 minutes)
2. Students offer examples of encounters with organizational bureaucracy. Tutor to help
by listing key ideas arising on board. (10 minutes)
3. Tutor issues extract by Blau for students to read. Class read and then tutor leads
discussion on questions 1 and 2 which follow. (15 minutes)
4. Split class into small groups and direct them to carry out Task B3. (10 minutes)
5. Groups report on their deliberations. General class discussion of the extent to which
rules identified are followed. (10 minutes)
Assessment task
Essay: With reference to an empirical example, discuss the validity of the distinction
between formal and informal relations in organizations.