Examining Academics' Perspectives on Weber's Bureaucracy Approach

Abstract

This study examines the university's bureaucratic structure where the academics are located based on Max Weber's bureaucracy approach. It is aimed to determine how academicians perceive the understanding of bureaucracy in universities and to make it more effective and efficient. Phenomenological research design, one of the qualitative research methods, was used in the research. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 27 academics working at universities in different regions of Turkey, and information on the bureaucratic structure of the academicians was obtained. Content analysis, one of the qualitative data analysis techniques, was used to analyze the data. It has been observed that academicians have different opinions on bureaucracy. It has been reached that bureaucratic structures can have positive and negative consequences. As a result, it is thought that the study will contribute to the maintenance or improvement of the functioning of bureaucratic structures.

Keywords

• Academics
• Bureaucracy
• Bureaucratic Structure
• Weber

Project Number

Bulunmamaktadır.

References

1. Abun, D., Calamaan, S. M. T., Magallanes, T., Encarnacion, M. J. and Sallong, M. (2021) ‘‘Bureaucratic Management Style and Workplace Well-Being of the Divine Word Colleges’’, International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science (2147- 4478): 10: 477 – 489, doi:10.20525/ijrbs.v10i3.1094. hal-03219035.
2. Berg, B. L. ve Lune, H. (2015) ‘‘Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri’’, çev ed. Hasan Aydın, İstanbul: Eğitim Yayınları.
3. Coccia, M. (2009) ‘‘Bureaucratization in Public Research Institutions’’, Minerva, 47:31–50, doi:10.1007/s11024-008-9113-z.
4. Fry, B. R. and Raadschelders, J. C. N. (2014) ‘‘Mastering Public Administration: from Max Weber to Dwight Waldo’’, Washington, D.C: CQ Press.
5. Hambrick, D. C. and Mason, P. A. (1984) ‘‘Upper Echelons: The Organization as a Reflection of Its Top Managers’’, Academy of Management Review, 9(2): 193–206.
6. Hegel, G. W. F. (1952) ‘‘The Philosophy of Right’’, Great Books of the Western World, (ed. R. M. Hutchins), 46:1–153, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
7. Hoy, W. K. and Sweetland, S. R. (2000) ‘‘Bureaucracies that Work: Enabling not Coercive’’, Journal of School Leadership, 10: 525-541.
8. Hoy, W. K. and Miskel, C. G. (2010) ‘‘Eğitim Yönetimi: Teori, Araştırma ve Uygulama [Educational Administration: Theory, research, and practice] (S. Turan, Trans. & Ed.)’’, Ankara, Turkey: Nobel. (Original work published 2004).

9. Khattak, M. N., Khan, M. B., Fatima, T. and Shah, S. Z. A. (2019) ‘‘The underlying mechanism between Perceived Organizational Injustice and Deviant Workplace Behaviors: Moderating Role of Personality Traits’’, Asia Pacific Management Review, 24(3): 201–211, https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmrv.2018.05.001.
10. Kniffin, K. M., Detert, J. R and Leroy, H. L. (2019) ‘‘On Leading and Managing: Synonyms or Separate (and Unequal)?’’, Academy of Management Discoveries, 6(4): 544–571, https://doi.org/10.5465/amd.2018.0227.
11. Kilinç, A. Ç., Koşar, S., Er, E. and Öğdem, Z. (2016) ‘‘The Relationship Between Bureaucratic School Structures and Teacher Self-Efficacy’’, McGill Journal of Education / Revue des sciences de l'éducation de McGill, 51(1), 615–634. https://doi.org/10.7202/1037362ar.
12. Köybaşı, F., Uğurlu, C. T. and Bakır, A. A. (2017) ‘‘The Factors that Influence Bureaucracy and Professionalism in Schools: A Grounded Theory Study’’, Journal of Education and Practice, 8(8): 196-207, www.iiste.org.
13. Langer, J., Feenay, M.K., and Lee, S.E. (2019) ‘‘Employee Fit and Job Satisfaction in Bureaucratic and Entrepreneurial Work Environments’’, Review of Public Personnel Administration, 39(1): 135–155.
14. Langer, J. (2022), 'Bureaucracy and the Imaginal Realm: Max Weber, Rationality and the Substantive Basis of Public Administration’’, Perspectives on Public Management and Governance, p. gvab033, https://doi.org/10.1093/ppmgov/gvab033.
15. Leite, A. B. R., Nobre, A. C. de O., Paz, A. W. C., Soares, L. H. D. N., Bizarria, F. P. de A. and Sousa Silva, A. M. (2021) ‘‘Reflections on the Limits and Possibilities of Democratic Management in High Schools in a City in Ceará’’, International Journal for Innovation Education and Research, 9(12 SE-Articles), 176–192, https://doi.org/10.31686/ijier.vol9.iss12.3574.
16. Patton, M. Q. (1990) ‘‘Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods (169-186)’’, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Ringer, F. (2004) ‘‘Max Weber: An Intellectual Biography’’, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
17. Roth, W. D. and Sonnert, G. (2011) ‘‘The Costs and Benefits of 'Red Tape': Anti-Bureaucratic Structure and Gender Inequity in a Science Research Organization’’, Social Studies of Science, 41(3): 385–409, https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312710391494.
18. Samier, E. (2005) ‘‘Toward a Weberian Public Administration: The Infinite Web of History, Values, and Authority in Administrative Mentalities’’, Halduskultuur, 6 (1): 60-94.
19. Terjesen, S. (2022) ‘‘Reducing Higher Education Bureaucracy and Reclaiming the Entrepreneurial University’’, In: Wennberg, K., Sandström, C. Questioning the Entrepreneurial State. International Studies in Entrepreneurship, Springer, 53:111-132. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-94273-1_7.
20. Wagner III, J. A. (2021) ‘‘Dimensional Research on Organization Structure: Meta-Analysis and Conceptual Redirection’’, Journal of Management & Organization, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1017/jmo.2021.63.
21. Weber, M. (1919) ‘‘Deutschlands Künftige Staatsform’’, Frankfurt am Main: Druck und Verlag der Frankfurter Societäts-Druckerei GmbH.
22. Weber, M. (1980) ‘‘Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft: Grundriss der Verstehenden Soziologie’’, Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck).
23. Weber, M. (1992) ‘‘Bureaucracy’’, (ed. J. M. Shafritz ve A. C. Hyde). Classics of Organization Theory, California: Wadsworth Publishing.
24. White, L. (1999) ‘‘Changing the Whole System in the Public Sector’’, Journal of Organizational Change Management, 13(2): 162-167.
25. Wilson, W. (1887) ‘‘The Study of Administration’’, Political Science Quarterly, 2(2): 197–22