In Praise of Bureaucracy? A Dissent From Australia

Abstract

This article explores whether bureaucracy creates alienation, through a case study of the Australian Public Service. By examining the structural determinants of seven job characteristics, it shows that alienation is generated by six features of bureaucracy: its clerical work, control imperative, organizational structures, impersonality, instrumental rationality, and language. The author argues that by de-bureaucratizing and closely aligning individual and organizational goals we can reduce alienation and increase worker productivity. The author concludes that by enabling civil servants to be efficient, equitable, nonpartisan, and accountable, bureaucracy does safeguard liberal democracy, but that in so doing it also generates alienation or “psychic entropy.”

Haven't We Been This Way Before? Evaluation and the Impediments to Policy Learning

“…If traditional bureaucrats and their organizations struggle to learn because of their organizational form, there is still the question of the role of standards, values, and beliefs in policy‐related learning in the civil service (Barzelay ; Matheson ). Where strong professional traditions are involved, civil servants may be disinclined to take evidence on board when such evidence conflicts with preferred ways of working (Forsetlund et al ; Macdonald ; Termeer ; Vince and Saleem ).…”

Understanding Employee Motivation to Innovate: Evidence from Front Line Employees in United States Federal Agencies

“…Organic or decentralised organisations empower their employees through an array of means, including consulting with them to get them to share their views and ideas; allowing them to participate in decisions affecting their work groups; and even delegating to them the authority to make important decisions (Thompson 1965; Pierce and Delbecq 1977; Damanpour 1991). Empowerment, by relaxing controls and decentralising authority, grants organisational members the autonomy to act in creative and innovative ways (Thompson 1964, 1965; Bowen and Lawler 1992; Scott and Bruce 1994; Pitts 2005; Matheson 2007). It also creates a safe climate for employees to exercise discretion in deviating from standard operating procedures or work processes.…”

Employee Empowerment, Employee Attitudes, and Performance: Testing a Causal Model

“…During the 1980s, however, global competition and strong pressure to continuously improve quality led many American firms to adopt employee empowerment programs (Bowen and Lawler , ; Conger and Kanungo ; Lawler, Mohrman, and Ledford ; Potterfield ; Spreitzer , ; Thomas and Velthouse ). Empowerment gained currency among government reformers as well, figuring prominently in the New Public Management reforms undertaken in the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, France, Sweden, Norway, and the United States, where it became one of the four guiding principles of the Bill Clinton administration's National Performance Review (Gore ; Kettl ; Matheson ; Peters ; Pollitt ; Wise ).…”