Title. (Effect of bureaucracy on employee’s performance)
• Introduction. The written part of the proposal should begin with an introduction – one or two paragraphs at most – in which you present an easily accessible story or example of what your proposed research is about. This is the only section of your assignment where you get to refer to popular sources such as reputable news outlets (e.g. BBC, Financial Times, The Guardian, The Economist), legitimate websites and reports (e.g. corporations, governments or other organisations of interest) and if absolutely necessary anecdotal personal experiences. The purpose of the introduction is to get your reader interested in the topic. You could simply title it “Introduction” or you could give it a more creative title that relates to what is in this introduction (200 words).
• Relevance. The next section of your proposal provides an overview of the proposed research and it is your opportunity to show how your proposal relates to business and management (i.e. its relevance). Building on the story or example from your introduction, you first need to explain what it is that you want to study. Once you have identified what you want to study you then need to state how your chosen research topic relates to what you have learned in this module. If we were to compare the research proposal with the take-home exam, then the introduction (above) is like the case (e.g. Amazon’s new technologies) and this section is like your answer to the question (i.e. your analysis of the case using the relevant theories, concepts and key terms fromthe module). This section will therefore provide the terms and grounds upon which you will then review the relevant literature in greater detail (400 words).
•Literature review. This section is the main part of your assignment. Here you draw on the most important academic journal articles that are related to your proposed research topic to provide a summary of what we already know about this topic. You must use the list of journals provided. It is where you present the library research you have done in the form of a review of the literature. The purpose of reviewing what we already know is to arrive at a point where it is clear that what we do not know is the thing you intend to research. This will take the form of a research question or a research problem. In the seminars you learned about how to formulate good research questions and problems. In other words, the whole purpose of this section is to develop the following structure: (a) “here is what we know”; (b) “therefore here is what we do not know”; (c) “therefore my research question is...”. (1000 words)
• Conclusion. The conclusion is the final written section of your proposal – one or two paragraphs. This is your chance to summarise your proposal in a couple of sentences and then convince your reader why studying this is necessary, interesting, important and significant. Think about the seminar on rhetoric and do your best to persuade your reader. (200 words)
• References. (Use Harvard Style) At the end of your proposal is a list of references under the title “References” in which you include full citations for everything you have cited in-text. Since your proposal will be used to assess the quality and originality of your ideas, whether you are able to think critically and whether you have a grasp of the relevant literature, it is important that you think carefully about whether your reference list reflects this. (400 words)
The system is a term which very much important for one’s day to day life as well as professional life. The world is organized in a system in which everything operates according to that system. In corporate offices also system is an integral part of the overall operation. As a result, bureaucracy is involved in the system which affects the working of the system. Since bureaucracy is also involved in governments, the governments across the world are trying to improve their bureaucratic systems in order to ensure transparency. Maintaining proper bureaucratic systems are both necessary for the effective functioning of the operations but sometimes it affects the performance of the employees working under the bureaucratic systems. As an organisation grows, the layers of management get increased which in turn affects the overall efficiency of the organisation. Though the logic behind creating a bureaucratic system was to increase the efficiency of the operation, this system sometimes acts as a drawback to creativity. There are instances of how a good and efficient bureaucratic system has resulted in the success of a company whereas examples of their failure are also there. This is a secondary research proposal which includes a qualitative approach. This report will focus on the aspects of bureaucracy on the corporate system and its effects on employee performance with relevant examples.
Large corporate often follow a strict bureaucratic system which is characterised by formalisation processes, strict rules and regulations, systematic recording of previous decisions by the management, systematic bookkeeping, strategic planning for business’s future and the hierarchical status of the positions (Sagnak, 2016). These types of characteristics often differ from organization to organization. In this report, the effect of the bureaucratic system on business houses will be studied thoroughly. When in the actual path of action bureaucracy never adjusts with the situation (Johnson, 2018). Since rules and regulations are the basis for any bureaucratic system, it sometimes treats fellow employees like robots. While treating the employees like robots, it is possible that sometimes these employees will disobey certain important decisions which will, in turn, affect the working of the company (Domingues et al. 2017). It is a fact that when a company grows, the productivity rate per employee decreases gradually along with the bureaucratic process of that company getting even more complex (Palos et al. 2016). Many times this orthodox system affects the morality of the employees. For an example, if a senior executive of a company such as the CEO dictates the HR of a company to recruit someone close to the CEO for an overrated pay package, there is actually no option left with that HR to disobey the order given to him by his senior even though he knows that it is morally wrong to hire someone with an extraordinary package in order to maintain stability of his own job. Thus it can be stated that sometimes unethical bureaucratic system takes undue advantage of the fear of unemployment and results in corporate corruption (Gibson et al. 2015). Flattening of the organisational structure is proving to be more cost effective and increase in productivity today while the effects of bureaucracy on the employee’s moral and ethical values can never be understated (AJAGBE et al. 2016). Employee engagement is a popular concept which is related to corporate success which may get badly disrupted because of inadequate corporate infrastructure. In case of an emergency decision to taken by the employee facing the emergency, the orthodox bureaucracy requires the employee to take permission or approval from his superior prior to take necessary actions (Paswan et al. 2017). This creates more complexity for the employee and the company in the market. Mostly government employees are the victims of the inefficient bureaucratic policy as any decision which should be taken involves a lot of approval from the hierarchical system. This is one way how the hierarchical system influences the overall performance of the employees.
According to Shim, et al, 2017, it may be stated that with lesser intervention by the government bureaucratic system, higher will be the chances for creativity and risk-taking abilities. Lesser dictatorship by the higher authorities will bring out more productivity and thus the quality of public services will be improved a lot. This article exposes the relation between the bureaucracy and the behavior of the public employee. Excessive control over the decision-making process by the hierarchical system encourages red-tapes and centralization which often slower the pace of growth. The motivation for public service is one of the main reason for the reduction in public employee turnover ratio. If an employee motivated from inside then the job satisfaction overrules the work exhaustion. Furthermore sharing the workloads proportionately by the senior managers will result in better productivity and this method will be an aspect of the effective bureaucratic system. An inefficient bureaucratic system can contribute to long working hours, work exhaustion, illogical workloads, lesser holidays and unreasonable expectations by the seniors. Conflict of job roles is a major problem in public sectors where unrealistic expectations from varied stakeholders may leave the employee with the intention for leaving the job as his performance will also get affected along with lesser job satisfaction ().
According to Madueyni, 2015, the presence of an organizational structure is important for a successful business. The manner in which responsibilities and power are allocated, and the job is divided among the employees is explained in the article. It also highlighted the point that an effective organisational structure is an integral part of the efficient functioning of the organisation. It also facilitates the proper working of the sub-units of the organisation with clear orders of what is to be done. The overall efficiency of the company may be increased with proper working of the system. Planning an efficient organisational structure and the implementation of the same is the main aspect of achieving long term aims. The productivity of the labors is increased with the specialisation of production process proving the positive effects of organisational structure.
The commonly accepted disadvantages of a bureaucratic system are it treated the employees or the subordinates like robots where there is no such involvement of brain power and where a linear work system is followed. If an employee wants an emergency leave, he has to get the approval of many senior managers like his reporting manager, the HR and also managers who are more senior in the hierarchical chain. This creates a sense of disgrace in the mind of the employee. Today the work culture is designed in a way where there is an adequate distribution of authority and responsibility throughout the organisational chain along with embedded leadership roles. The trend is to flatten the orthodox bureaucratic structure in order to make operations faster without much approval from the seniors (O'Neill et al. 2016). On the other hand, the bureaucracy being not enough fashionable nowadays has its own merits in its own way and is often considered the most powerful and suitable route for organisational performance. Many top companies though claim to have decentralised their decision-making process, are still holding key decision-making areas with themselves so as to control the overall functioning of the company such as dividend distribution, collaboration with other companies and so on. It is also argued that controlling the operations with a more narrow approach with the highest levels of transparency, often reduces the chances of corporate frauds and chances of workers getting paid without working (Zakrzewska-Bielawska, 2016).
There are enough instances of a thriving bureaucratic structure contributing to the success of the organisation. Companies ruled by an effective bureaucracy often reach the height of their success as every process under the supervision of the actual stakeholders of the company (Eisend et al. 2016). This process also increases productivity and even motivated the workers to give more efforts in return for incentives. World-renowned IT giants like Google, Microsoft, and Berkshire Hathaway are examples of a thriving corporate bureaucracy (Frisby, 2016). Since all the rules are clearly stated, the chances of confusion regarding any operation are reduced a lot.
The promotions and change in designations of the employees are formal and will be held accountable for any discrepancies in their decision-making abilities (Ocasio, 2017). Hiring process purely based on merit and talent and not on favoritism are the characteristics of an efficient bureaucratic process. The pay-grade salary structure is also useful in organised bureaucracy as it prevents demotivation among the employees of all grade (Bauer et al. 2016). As micro-management is an integral part of the system, there is no room left for any inefficient workers. Micromanagement also helps to address critical problems related to business processes which may lead to bigger concerns in the long run if left unnoticed. As bureaucracies are much organised, fair and orderly, the power control chain is much smaller, the level of customer service increases where every detail is looked upon and judged from the perspective of the senior level management (Kalkan, 2016). Proper employee codes of conduct are laid down in this process which has always proven to protect employees from workplace harassments and hazards. Roles and responsibilities are shared according to the competencies of the employees which ensure the quality of the work. Any important decision that needs to be discussed first in detail among competent authorities before the implementation (Gulrajani, 2015).
Uniformity is to be maintained in the bureaucratic process so that it never creates more pressure on the employees and also achieves organisational goals from time to time. There should be changes in the organisational process such as cultural, strategic and operational in nature so as to formulate effective bureaucratic policy. The leaders of the organisation should be more alert to educate the employees on the positive points of the system while having an ear to listen and act against the negatives. Before creating an effective and efficient bureaucracy, there is a need for the leaders to change their mindset in such a way so that they can monitor the things more minutely and look into the problems in detail. Frequent employee training programmes should be organised in order to make employees more skillful and ready to take on more crucial responsibilities. The decision-making process should be more transparent and the voice of the fellow employees should be regarded as important.