Max weber and the structuralist school

General characteristics of the structuralist school

This current appears in the late 1950s and is made up of a group of psychologists and sociologists who are dedicated to studying human behavior.

The structuralist current of the administration aims to balance the company's resources, paying attention to both its structure and human resources, addressing aspects such as the correspondence between the formal and informal organization, between the organization's objectives and personal objectives, and between material and social stimuli. Its main objective is to study the problems of companies and their causes, paying special attention to aspects of authority and communication. Consider that there are four elements common to all companies: authority, communication, behavioral structure, formalization structure.

One of its most important researchers was Max Weber, as were Mayntz, Barnard, Etzioni

Biographical References of Max Weber

Ertfurt, 1864 - Munich, 1920

German sociologist and economist

He was the most important student of the structure and principles of the bureaucracy. Initiator and exponent of the structuralist school. His activity in politics is remarkable.

His most important works were:

Economy and society. Work published after his death that gathers the main of his thought. Protestant ethics and spirit of capitalism. He maintains that the emergence and development of capitalism in the countries of central and northern Europe responds to the Calvinist ethic, thereby opposing Marxist theses. On the objectivity of sociological and sociopolitical knowledge. Where he proposed a methodology to study social phenomena.

Max Weber's contributions to the structuralist school of administration

We will now emphasize the contributions that Weber provided to the administration and the structuralist school, focusing his studies on rationalization; democracy; behavior; authority, of which he distinguishes three fundamental types: the traditional, the rational-legal and the charismatic; and the bureaucracy of which it makes a bureaucratic model. The latter presents both positive aspects, which were accentuated by Weber and his defenders, as well as negative aspects regarding public opinion. Weber deeply analyzed organizations from different points of view.

His contributions to the administration were very important, but they were recognized 20 years after his death:

Authority. Of which he distinguishes three fundamental types: the traditional, the rational-legal and the charismatic; The bureaucracy. From which arises the bureaucratic model, which presents both positive aspects, which were emphasized by Weber and his defenders, as well as negative aspects regarding public opinion.

The authority

Max Weber entered his analysis in those areas of interest in which economics and sociology were related in order to interpret the motivations of behavior. He focused his attention on power and the legitimation of authority. It is based on a concept of legitimate authority, unlike the classic concept of authority of divine origin. It considers that it is a tool to impose the will of a person on the behavior of others and that there are those who can exercise it and those who cannot.

Weber distinguishes three fundamental types of authority:

Traditional authority. Here it considers that the acceptance of authority is based on the fact that it has always proceeded in this way, the habituality of uses and customs gives it legitimacy. It focuses on the principle of custom and is often reflected in political institutions with hereditary positions. Those who hold authority are legitimized by force of custom and have enjoyed a special status from time immemorial, changes can only occur if a certain portion of the population wishes. Charismatic authority: Presence of sociopsychological factors. Acceptance of authority comes from the personal influence of the superior. It is based on the personal conditions of the person exercising authority. This is the leader's own: the boss is recognized as such for his exceptional personal qualities, such as heroism, holiness, genius. Often residual, Weber noted that charismatic authority tends to become traditional authority over time. The Vatican, the pope, the cardinals and the bishops are examples of the routine charism of the apostolic succession. Legal-rational authority: Individuals accept authority because they rationally believe in the legitimacy of the norms that grant the exercise of power. These norms regulate the right of individuals who are active subjects of authority to exercise this (authority) in the context of those (norms). It is based on positive law, on the principle of legality.

The three types of authority are found, with greater or lesser force, in all political societies. Even the most purely charismatic regimes seek the appearance of legality, and in a large number of those that base legitimacy mainly on the legal-rational order there are important traditional elements.

Bureaucracy

Weber's model is absolutely formal and rigid. Authority is determined by positions and not by people and all the relationships that it establishes between people are formal, forgetting the individual and their behaviors. Thus Weber transformed the classic concept of authority into a legal one, over time these rules end up being formalized into legal norms that would determine the basis for social coexistence, economic policy… These authorities are the ones that make up the structure of the organizations.

Weber was the first sociologist who studied organizations according to ideal models of behavior and developed a bureaucratic model, which he considered applicable to capitalist societies as well as those of the socialist type. It considers the bureaucracy as the only means to maximize the efficiency, the performance of any order of organizations. Weber highlights several features or characteristics in the bureaucracy:

Maximum division of labor: every organization to achieve its objectives must break down the total work into operations. The functions are assigned and each official knows in advance which ones he must fulfill.
- As an organism, company, entity, institution, as the function of distributing the work giving formal authorities.
Hierarchy of authority: organizations must be structured under a hierarchy of authority, it is used primarily as an evaluation of planned results. It is based on the certainty of the knowledge of the superiors and subordinates of the hierarchical scale, already predetermined. It is a formal operating scheme where each position in the organization is occupied by officials who are called agents. The authority of officials is given by the legality of their specific positions. Determination of rules: which assign responsibility and work, which must be governed by abstract rules emanating from the general direction to achieve uniformity and coordination of the execution of any organization. The rules of conduct are predictable as the patterns of behavior have been predetermined.The performance of the position by the officials is carried out according to general norms, susceptible to learning, more or less fixed and more or less complete. Impartial administration: the ideal leader must manage without passion without affection or enthusiasm. Job security and qualification technical: employment in organizations should be a career for members to develop and advance on merit and seniority in the position and not on recommendations. Officials must be salaried employees and there must be no affectio societatis.Avoid corruption: Clear differentiation of the assets and income of the members for private fortune and income granted for their work in the organization.There are no informal relationships since only relationships are established within the framework of the legal authority and its rules.There are two lines of authority, the ascending and the descending, without admitting any horizontal relationship, which allows better social control.The operation of the organization is formalized through written records, which depersonalizes the positions, so that an official it can disappear and be replaced by another without its functions ceasing to be fulfilled. There is a conception of the organization as a "paradise of rationality." Its ultimate goal is to achieve a situation of pure calculability.so that one official can disappear and be replaced by another without their functions ceasing to be fulfilled. There is a conception of the organization as a "paradise of rationality." Its ultimate goal is to achieve a situation of pure calculability.so that one official can disappear and be replaced by another without their functions ceasing to be fulfilled. There is a conception of the organization as a "paradise of rationality." Its ultimate goal is to achieve a situation of pure calculability.

Advantages of the bureaucratization model according to Weber

Weber considered that this model allowed the integral realization of human freedom, by not allowing the free negotiation of the parties to arise the abuses of those who had greater power. As the model was fully constituted, there was no bargaining of the parties and who decided What was best for all was legal authority. The bureaucratization process leads to the adoption of the most efficient recruitment methods. The election is carried out by the formal hierarchy, which will objectively select the staff. The official chosen by his boss performs his function more accurately from a technical and professional point of view that is more likely to determine his election and his career. Bureaucratization would bring about I get the validity of certain sociological attitudes beneficial for efficiency,as they are for example:
1. The member of the organization would tend to sharply separate his personal life from his activity in the organization. The bureaucracy exerts strong pressure in favor of impersonality in organizational behavior. The achievement of this would be one of her greatest merits.
Rigorous bureaucratization would accelerate the rate of reaction of the administration to the given situations. Bureaucratization is a form of rationality in action, it is a field where the discussion would be meaningless, it would constitute a technical, aseptic resource, independent of any type of prior values Quickness in decisions, because everyone knows what should be done and who should do it Reliability, because the business is conducted according to known rules Consistency, because the same types of decision must be made in the same circumstances.

Criticism of Weber's bureaucratic perspective

For public opinion, bureaucracy implies the opposite of Weber and his defenders. He considered that the bureaucracy, in addition to being rigid, is inefficient, inhuman, mechanistic, slow, uneconomic and eliminates any aspect of the human plane from the tasks of the organization.

Although Weber recognized the importance of the informal structure, he did not include it in his ideal type of bureaucracy. The bureaucratic organization is influenced by factors linked to human behavior that were not taken into account by Weber.

Weber's distinctions between types of authority are exaggerated.

In any organization, in addition to formal relationships, due to man's own social nature, informal, spontaneous relationships occur. Both types of relationships overlap and sometimes come to conflict causing chaos.

While the implementation of strict standards of behavior ensures accuracy and reliability, it also eliminates initiative and renders the official inept in responding to changing circumstances.

CONCLUSION

Weber's ideal model was a first integrative attempt at administrative control, starting from an equal whole with directors and ideal men, without taking into account that the ideal does not exist, and with it the stage of formal modeling is closed. Weber considered that the bureaucracies constituted with the characteristics previously mentioned were especially effective to fulfill the functions of any organization and therefore he trusted that bureaucratization would spread throughout the modern world.

Weber analyzed the bureaucracy from a purely mechanical and non-political point of view, concerned with showing how rules and laws are established and obeyed. Weber did not consider the subjective and informal aspects of the acceptance of these norms and the legitimacy of authority, nor the formal reaction of the organization to the lack of consent of subordinates.

Weber was concerned with the characteristics, growth, and consequences of bureaucracy. His biggest contribution was considering the organization as a whole. The bureaucratic model was deeply studied and analyzed in all its characteristics, with the purpose of seeking inspiration for a new administrative theory. This model offered several advantages. However, bureaucratic rationality by ignoring the people who participate in the organization, constitute problems that this type of organization cannot solve adequately. We could say that the Weberian model became the ideal model of bureaucracy and not the absolute model.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

The organizational thought of Bernardo Kliksberg, editorial thesis.Administration of organizations on the threshold of the third millennium by Ricardo F. Solana.Introduction to the general theory of administration by Idalberto Chiavenato.Aula Encyclopedia, volumes: humanities and biogarfías.Encyclopedia Encarta 2000www.lafacu.comwww.unamosapuntes.comwww.monographies.com

In the following video-lesson, by Educatina, the contributions of Max Weber, the main representative of the Structuralist School of administration, are synthesized. A good complement for your learning.

Download the original file