Causes, Consequences, And Solutions Of Bureaucracies Adapting To Organizational Complexity And Social Environment

Causes of bureaucrats and bureaucracies to adapt to the complexity of their organization and social environment

For every organization, whether private or public, to achieve the goals of the company, both the employers and the employees need to comply with the organization’s social environment and complexity. However, there exist both negative and positive effects of abiding by the company’s complexity. In the business field, the term bureaucracy refers to the method of administratively coordinating a large number of individuals who require to cooperate in a given work according to Balla & Gormley, (2017). In this situation, the administrations refer to the specific individuals whom the company have given the responsibility to organize to perform a particular task. On the other side, Bennis, (2017) argues that bureaucrats mean the groups of officials from the government or private companies who perform the administrative duties to ensure employees stick to what the company needs.

On the other hand, the complexity of the organization refers to the number of resources the company use to produce goods and services in reference to Bennis, (2017). Social environment refers to people whom the companies sell their products to every day. These people are related to the company because the policies that the industry makes affects them indirectly. In this assignment, it is going to elaborate causes of the bureaucrats and bureaucracies abiding by the complexity of their organizational environment and social environments, their effects and solution to the challenges they can face in adapting environments.

Several factors force bureaucrats and bureaucracies to adapt to the complexity and the social environment of the organization according to Destler, (2015). The first cause is that the authority of the company has a set of goals that the employees need to stick to while working in the organization. It differs from collegial companies where the members can operate the way they want. The rules that the management lays down forces the members to adapt to the situation of the company. For example, if it is a communication avenue, the members must follow the protocol the company have set. The failure to comply with the rules may attract a penalty and destruct the company from achieving the goal it has laid down in reference to La Palombara, (2015). The second cause of the matter is the limited resources that the company have in the industry. For instance, the management of the companies always come up with a specific budget that the members will use to run the company for the rest of the financial year. The situation forces the bureaucrats and the bureaucracies to stick on the company’s complexity.

However, when it comes to social norms, it may contain a mixture of various cultures. One of the factors that assist the company to adapt in the social environment is the experience. When bureaucrats and bureaucracies begin working on a new environment, they may not be aware of the composition of the society, how each group act among other factors. In the course of operation, the industry would be getting the response from the members and the feedback would assist them to correct in places they are not perfect in to accommodate the diversity in the culture. The second motivating factor that helps the companies to adapt to the social environment is having members from different communities. In this case, every religion will feel part of the company. For instance, both bureaucrats and bureaucracies should have some level of diversity to assist them to bring different ideas to the industry. From that perspective, it is very easy for the company to get used to the culture of the people, what they need and how to respond to their needs. Apart from composition another factor that promotes adaptivity is being flexible to change according to the needs of the society.

The consequence of bureaucrats and bureaucracies’ efforts to adapt to the complexity of their organizational and social environment

There exist both positive and negative effects of bureaucrats and bureaucracies adapting to the social environment and the complexity of the organization. The first positive impact is that the action promotes teamwork. The bureaucrats always outline the rules that the members should follow while working in the company. When the rules are friendly to everybody, and the members agree to comply, it will bring teamwork to the industry. Secondly, no conflict arises in the company. The battle may exist either among the company members or between the company and the society. However, when the administrative body learns what the society needs and they adapt the social environment within the company, there is no conflict which can erupt. In addressing the matter, the bureaucrats should not come up with laws that may disappoint a specific society, but the rules should be universal. On the other side, the members should also adapt to the rules; no one should operate the way he or she likes but according to what the organization needs.

Even though there is though there is a lot of benefits in adapting to the social climate and organizational complexity, the bureaucrats and bureaucracies face many challenges in meeting their goals. One of the first challenges is the existence of many communities that have their own belief and way of doing things according to Dubois, (2016). These communities expect the companies to operate according to their needs. However, the company cannot meet all the requirements but cut across all the cultural groups. The administrative bodies end up encountering opposing from the communities that feel the company have not complied to what they need. Such actions leave the industry at crossroads because they also laws to meet within the company. Another challenge is the politics. Politicians are the ones who amend and amend the law of the land. However, these laws have a direct effect on the bureaucrats and the bureaucracies according to Dimock, (2018). For instance, the politicians may change laws that require industry to have a specific amount of capital before they start operation. These laws affect the way the companies adapt to the complexity of the company.  Apart from the rules, the bureaucrat’s agencies may be dominated by politicians who may not be able to understand what the society needs in the areas they lead.

Rasul & Rogger, (2018) argues that, in some situations the group of bureaucrats who come up with policies that different sectors need to follow is not the same body that oversees the implementation of the systems. In this situation, conflict may arise because the subjects may end up failing to conform to the rules and the regulation that the government requires them to obey. In some situations, there exist different models of bureaucracy, however, companies may not be aware of the best model to use. For example, they can be making use of the acquisitive model which may not be applicable in the country or the stakeholders lack education about the model. Lack of awareness concerning the model may pose a considerable challenge to the industry on how to implement the bureaucracy. The last problem is that many people have mixed ideas concerning the bureaucrats in reference to Sarangi & Slembrouck, (2014). Some people think that the role of the bureaucrats is to push government agendas only. It may be one of the functions of bureaucrats. However, these people educate people on how they can operate in various industries.

Challenges bureaucrats and bureaucracies are facing in adapting to social environment and organization complexity

After looking at the causes of challenges to the bureaucrats and bureaucracies, there are several solutions to ensure that they adapt to the social environment. The first solution is creating awareness between the two groups. For instance, the bureaucrats should teach the communities and the entire society on the importance of following rules that the government requires. The standard that the authority sets are there to protect customers and give them quality services. Apart from that the rules, assist the government to reach a level of economic stability. All the stakeholders should be aware of all the benefits to ensure they adapt to the situation in reference Sarker, Bingxin, Sultana & Prodhan, (2017). Secondly, all the people that the policies affect should always be flexible, the authority cannot address the problem of everyone in the society according O’Neill, Beauvais & Scholl, (2016), but everybody should be ready to give and take to make the community a quality place to live.

On the other hand, the aspect of bureaucracy to ignore external advice is not appropriate; several have failed in the economy because they ignore advice from the outside of the bureaucracy system. The solution to the arising method is that everybody should have a say in what the administrative body is creating according to Thompson, (2017). The option will motivate not only the workers but also the community surrounding the company or the organization.

Conclusion

In summary, the approach of the bureaucracy of making use of the past strategies to address the present matters is unfair. There are several current matters that leaders can incorporate into the system to make it possible for the bureaucrats and the bureaucracy to adapt to the social environment which has different groups of communities. Continuous consultations between stakeholders would assist in creating an agreement to every party, and the system will not risk rejection by investors and entrepreneurs.

References

Balla, S. J., & Gormley Jr, W. T. (2017). Bureaucracy and democracy: Accountability and performance. CQ Press.

Bennis, W. G. (2017). Beyond bureaucracy. In American Bureaucracy (pp. 3-16). Routledge.

Bennis, W. G. (2017). American bureaucracy. Routledge.

Destler, I. M. (2015). Presidents, bureaucrats and foreign policy: The politics of organizational reform. Princeton University Press.

Dimock, M. E. (2018). Administrative vitality: The conflict with bureaucracy. Routledge.

Dubois, V. (2016). The bureaucrat and the poor: Encounters in French welfare offices. Routledge.

La Palombara, J. (Ed.). (2015). Bureaucracy and Political Development.(SPD-2) (Vol. 2). Princeton University Press.

O’Neill, J. W., Beauvais, L. L., & Scholl, R. W. (2016). The use of organizational culture and structure to guide strategic behavior: An information processing perspective. Journal of Behavioral and Applied Management, 2(2), 816.

Rasul, I., & Rogger, D. (2018). Management of bureaucrats and public service delivery: Evidence from the nigerian civil service. The Economic Journal, 128(608), 413-446.

Sarangi, S., & Slembrouck, S. (2014). Language, bureaucracy and social control. Routledge.

Sarker, M. N. I., Bingxin, Y., Sultana, A., & Prodhan, A. S. (2017). Problems and challenges of public administration in Bangladesh: pathway to sustainable development. International Journal of Public Administration and Policy Research, 2(1), 008-015.

Thompson, J. D. (2017). Organizations in action: Social science bases of administrative theory. Routledge.