Are bureaucracies generally bad?

Post Reply New Topic

Are bureaucracies generally bad, regardless of whether they are privately operated or government operated?

Burocracies are inevitable. Any business firm large than a lemonade stand needs to be divided into departments. Some compartmentalization of function is a requirement for a complicated business or government to run at all. We have burocracy for the same reason we have specialization of labor.

ruveyn

It depends of the context

The very first mission of a bureaucracy is to provide efficiency by centralizing, organizing and leading an organization in a structured manner. A bad bureaucracy is one that would fail to carry on its mission

The most famous reason for a bad bureaucracy, I think, is the lack of flexibility, if the organization that is overlooked by the bureaucracy changes, there might be a lag before the bureaucracy successfully adapts to the new condition

The overlooked organization might change in two ways:
- up-size or downsize of the activity
- structural changes of the activity

Public structures might be less efficient because:
- it is harder to layoff staff because of the implicit deal of government employment (lower wages but higher job security)
- the missions given to government organizations is more likely to change according to policies
- is not profit-centric
- the size of the bureaucracy is much larger and deeper

Private structures might be more flexible because:
- they can easily lay off the bureaucracy staff
- their activity is less likely to change radically
- directly depends on profit

I believe that all governments are bad

Very likely so. But one thing is worse: no government at all.

I believe there are no good governments. There are only bad governments and worse governments.

ruveyn

I don't think the majority of humans are capable of peaceful coexistence in anarchy. I myself am.

Inferior people need people to rule over them, limit them and control them. This is where government serves it's purpose.

Watch Buried, an artistic film that recently came out, and you'll see why bureaucracies can be atrocious.

I often feel the same way.

However I think that not all forms of anarchy are destined to fail.

I would say an efficient bureaucracy is an oxymoron, but I get the point you are making.

The very evil of a bureaucracy is that it's about delegating power to get things done. The inherent problem is that in such delegation, you have oversight, checks and balances, etc. which really means no one person has the power to do anything. He makes a call, it gets routed up a chain of people until someone sufficiently powerful enough gives the OK to do it.

So, rather than just the one person with the power to make the call being the first one you deal with, you go through a small army of lackeys who push paper and little more than that. This consumes resources and energy with people who can't get things done in an efficient manner.

The bridge joining Oakland and San Francisco was initially built by one man given all the authority he needed to get the job done. It was completed in a matter of months for an affordable cost. Now that bridge needs to be redone. Just the planning phase cost millions of dollars, took an army or people and 10 years to complete JUST THE PLANNING of the project because everyone had to have a say in the matter.

One man = results

Committee = delays and expense

Delegating someone (one person) authority over a specific area is one thing. To delegate power to a hundred people to inter-manage a department just leads to waste.

Bureaucracy comes with a set of benefits and drawbacks that differ from those of governance by fiat/sole proprietorship and other models of social organization.

The shipping department in a firm that produces or distributes goods to customers is a bureaucracy. If it does its job well, i.e. get the goods out to customers quickly and accurately it is functioning well. Such a bureaucracy is necessary for such a firm to operate so it performs a valid function. Not all
bureaucracies are committees that fiddle, diddle and delay. So your blanket statement as a generality is refuted. Some bureaucracies are beneficial, others are not.

ruveyn

One man may equal results, the question is what results? If I'm elected Leader of Earth, I will make sure I have nice cars and people don't hurt me. Everything else I really could care less about.

Let us judge the worth of the tree by it's fruits - again how can there possibly be one absolute and final answer to this question?

All generalizations are false.

ruveyn

I would raise a question over your understanding of what exactly 'anarchy' is?

The roots of the word are greek, 'an-archos' - 'without rulers', this does not mean without order or chaos as so often claimed.

http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/ try this link.

peace j

and thus spaketh the grand generaliser...