Weber’s Bureaucracy and Bureaucracy that Exists in The Us Society

Max Weber, one of the world’s most influential sociologists, was revolutionary in his thinking, and his interpretation of sociological concepts are still studied today. Max Weber proposed a number of theories to the sociological world, with one of the most well known being his evaluation of bureaucracy. While many other governments have bureaucracies, it is most useful to look at the US governmental institution when we evaluate Weber’s perception of bureaucracy. Max Weber proposed that bureaucracy is an organization that can only exist in the modern state and the most advanced institutions of capitalism. Bureaucracy, as he understood it, is a system in which the government or a business can run and execute its tasks most efficiently. Federal bureaucracy, such as the one that exists in the United States, is a type of governmental organization that is highly structured and formalized. The cabinet departments are a great example of how bureaucracy functions in the US government, and these departments are mainly controlled by the president and Congress.

Weber first explained how officials in a bureaucracy are selected into office on the basis of their competence, as opposed to their relationship to a politician. Essentially, this means that hiring is based on one’s merit, as are promotions. In the past, US presidents often participated in the spoils system, which is when after winning an election, the president would give government jobs to their supporters, friends or family members. This was very problematic, as many unqualified individuals became members of the government who were responsible for making the difficult decisions that would impact the entire country. In an effort to stop this, potential government workers were chosen based on the Pendleton Civil Service Reform Act, which required an exam to be taken in order to qualify, as opposed to just having a relation to the politician. Circling back to Weber’s idea, he felt that this was very important in order to run a fair and orderly governmental operation. These officials were not elected into office by the public, but instead appointed based on technical qualification. In the US bureaucracy, the cabinet heads are appointed by the president. Weber emphasizes that officials should be appointed to their position based on skill set. The bureaucracy is organized in a way to accommodate people’s skill sets, and places people in positions where their talents are utilized. In terms of the US cabinet, the department of defense, for example, should be led by someone who has national security experience in order for that department to thrive. You wouldn’t appoint someone with a more general skill set to a job that requires specific expertise.

Another important facet of Weber’s understanding of bureaucracy is the idea that all government employees should have impersonal relationships with one another. Since bureaucracy is a form of rational-legal authority, members who compose the bureaucracy must make decisions based on a rational basis as opposed to a personal one. Rational-legal authority is one of Weber’s three ideal types of political leadership, and it is the one that exists in most modern and Western societies. Weber recognized that an official’s conduct and achievements at work would be judged by how much they are able to accomplish, not by any personal relationship they may have to the person judging them. This is crucial in order to avoid any bias that any one party may have towards another.

In addition, Weber recognized that in order for a bureaucracy to run properly, there needs to be an extensive list of rules and regulations that are clear and stable. This is essential so that there is no confusion about what certain officials can and cannot do. Other government authorities, such as traditional or charismatic, do not have such ridged laws or rules as the bureaucracy does, but these laws allow for a system of checks and balances that assures that one entity does not have an unfair amount of power or authority over another. In the US cabinet departments, there are a number of laws and rules in which members of the bureaucracy must abide to. Some people critique Weber for this ideal as some people think that these rules are unnecessarily overemphasized and do not necessarily apply to all situations that may occur. In addition, the extent to which these rules are followed could significantly slow the process of decision making, which is kind of ironic since the system of bureaucracy is established in order to reach resolutions in a mannerly and efficient fashion.

Weber’s proposal of bureaucracy and how it should function is fairly similar to the bureaucracy that exists in the US society. Weber was one of the first sociologists who really payed attention to the significance of bureaucracy and how useful it can be in terms of establishing authority. Most of the components of Weber’s understanding of bureaucracy is still applicable to governments today, as highlighted by the existence, maintenance and endurance of the cabinet departments in the US government.