Business Question

1Literature Review on Bureaucratic Organizations
Student Full Name
Institutional Affiliation
Course Full Title
Instructor Full Name
Due date
2
Literature Review on Bureaucratic Organizations
Abstract
The literature review will examine the impact of bureaucratic traits on organizational structure,
culture, innovation, and human resources.
•
Characterized by hierarchical authority, formal rules, division of labor, and merit-based
hiring, bureaucracies promote standardized efficiency but reduce flexibility, stagnation,
and engagement.
•
It is vital to balance formalization to achieve the proper control functions and flatten
structures that enable team collaboration, delegation of certain decisions, and use of
discretion.
•
Future studies should evaluate long-term cultural and strategic metrics after organizations
implement structural changes.
II. Introduction
A bureaucratic organization is a government agency or commercial business with an
enforced chain of command and closely regulated operating procedures.
• These organizations have an administrative system that relies on policies, rules, and
hierarchy in private and public busine
ss environments.
• Hierarchical authority distribution and structures with a bureaucratic nature, formal rules,
division of labor, and staffing based on merit are fundamental in both public and private
sector institutions (Besley et al., 2022).
• Weber contends that the bureaucratic model comprises clearly defined hierarchies and
specialists and emphasizes rules rather than personal connections (Haveman & Wetts,
3
2019). The review will examine how bureaucratic organizational structures affect design
and outcomes.
Bureaucratic structures boost organizational effectiveness; however, their hierarchical
structure restricts participation and flexibility, making complementary, decentralized,
collaborative techniques necessary to maximize operations.
III. Findings
a. Centralized hierarchies
Bureaucratic organizations have authority from the upper levels down to the bottom. Such
hierarchies result in good monitoring, but delays may occur if the information passes
through multiple levels (Kallio et al., 2020).
b. Bureaucratic organizations have task-specialized, routine job functions
These increase efficiency through expertise and promote monotony (Martela, 2019).
c. Impersonality and formal rules
The rules provide uniform operation but discourage personal relationships and initiatives.
Suzuki and Hur (2020) argue that these characteristics make employees feel unvalued and
lack the morale to work.
d. Hiring processes have mechanisms that reduce nepotism
They restrain the flexibility in staffing (Haveman & Wetts, 2019). Stability in bureaucratic
organizations is based on hierarchical promotion ladders and permanent employment,
enhancing innovation since contemporary consumers prefer creativity and flexibility
(Kallio et al., 2020).
These characteristics generate productive standardized processes, uninterrupted continuity
even over personnel changes, improved quality because of specialization, and efficient
4
management due to the clear lines of authority (Besley et al., 2022). These characteristics
also involve limitations like rigidity, conservatism due to micro-management, and delayed
modernization.
e. Bureaucracy affects the business sector despite being frequently connected to government
agencies.
Bureaucratic organizations hinder employee involvement and decision-making processes
due to their hierarchical structure.
IV. Recommendations
Organizations can retain a clear hierarchy and accountability to optimize bureaucratic processes.
•
Various decisions in such organizations should be pushed to cross-functional teams that
provide holistic outcomes (Kallio et al., 2020).
Bureaucratic organizations can achieve flexibility by offering discretion when necessary (Suzuki
& Hur, 2020).
•
According to Haveman and Wetts (2019), regular modernization assessment helps these
organizations avoid stagnation risks.
Future research should compare innovation rate, employee retention, and other metrics across
companies transitioning from strict bureaucratic models to different alternatives.
•
This approach will contribute to the development of the best structural designs. Similarly,
future studies should conduct longitudinal and qualitative research to assess the effects of
bureaucracies over time.
V. Conclusions
•
Overall, bureaucracies create standardized outputs, though they prevent innovation and
morale.
5
•
Bureaucratic organizations can create flexibility by using flat structures, teams, and
decentralization, guaranteeing formal competent operation.
•
Organizations should combine formalization with flexibility to ensure employees exceed
basic requirements and are motivated to achieve organizational goals.
6
References
Besley, T., Burgess, R., Khan, A., & Xu, G. (2022). Bureaucracy and development. Annual
Review of Economics, 14, 397-424.
https://www.academia.edu/download/79427423/Bureaucracy_Development.pdf
Haveman, H. A., & Wetts, R. (2019). Organizational theory: From classical sociology to the
1970s. Sociology Compass, 13(3), e12627. DOI:10.1111/soc4.12627
Kallio, T. J., Kallio, K. M., & Blomberg, A. (2020). From professional bureaucracy to
competitive bureaucracy–redefining universities’ organization principles, performance
measurement criteria, and reason for being. Qualitative research in accounting &
management, 17(1), 82-108.
https://www.utupub.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/168612/Kallio%20et%20al.%202020%2
0QRAM_parallel%20version.pdf?sequence=1
Martela, F. (2019). What makes self-managing organizations novel? Comparing how Weberian
bureaucracy, Mintzberg’s adhocracy, and self-organizing solve six fundamental
problems of organizing. Journal of Organization Design, 8(1), 1–23.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s41469-019-0062-9
Suzuki, K., & Hur, H. (2020). Bureaucratic structures and organizational commitment: findings
from a comparative study of 20 European countries. Public Management Review, 22(6),
877-907. https://www.academia.edu/download/59669857/Suzuku_HurBureaucratic_structures_and_organizational_commitment-201920190611-402051y9ohma.pdf
BUSI 610
LITERATURE REVIEW: FINAL ASSIGNMENT INSTRUCTIONS
OVERVIEW
What Is a Literature Review?
A literature review is a survey and a discussion of the literature in a given area of study. It is a
concise overview of what has been studied, argued, and established about a topic; it is generally
organized chronologically or thematically. A literature review is also written in essay format.
A literature review is not an annotated bibliography because it groups related works together and
discusses trends and developments rather than focusing on one item at a time. It is also not a
summary; rather, a literature review evaluates previous and current research in regards to how
relevant and/or useful it is and how it relates to your own research. Therefore, a literature review
is more than an annotated bibliography or a summary because you are organizing and presenting
your sources in terms of their overall relationship to your problem statement.
A literature review is written to highlight specific arguments and ideas in a field of study. By
highlighting these arguments, the writer attempts to show what has been studied in the field and
also where there are weaknesses, gaps, or areas needing further study. The literature review must
also demonstrate to the reader why the writer’s research is useful, necessary, important, and
valid.
Literature reviews can have different types of audiences, so consider why and for whom you are
writing your review. For example, many literature reviews are written as a chapter for a thesis or
dissertation in order to support a proposal or are written in order to help the writer develop a base
of knowledge in a particular business area.
Asking the following questions will assist you in sifting through your sources and organizing
your literature review. Remember, your Literature Review: Final Assignment organizes the
previous research in light of what you are planning to do in your own project.
•
•
•
•
•
•
What’s been done in this topic area to date? What are the significant discoveries, key
concepts, arguments, and/or theories that scholars have put forward? Which are the
important works?
On which particular areas of the topic has previous research concentrated? Have there
been developments over time? What methodologies have been used?
Are there any gaps in the research? Are there areas that have not been looked at closely
yet but should be? Are there new ways of looking at the topic?
Are there improved methodologies for researching this subject?
What future directions should research in this subject take?
How will your research build on or depart from current and previous research on the
topic? What contribution will your research make to the field?
How Do I Organize and Structure the Literature Review?
There are several ways to organize and structure a literature review. Two common ways are
chronologically and thematically. You will be using the thematic structure in this review. In a
thematic review, you will group and discuss your sources in terms of the themes or topics they
cover. This method is often a stronger one organizationally, and it can also assist you in resisting
the urge to summarize your sources. By grouping themes or topics of research together, you will
Page 1 of 4
BUSI 610
be able to demonstrate the types of topics that are important to your research. For example, if the
topic of the literature review is improving productivity in organizations, then there might be
separate sections of research involving service-oriented businesses, production-oriented
businesses, non-profit organizations, governmental organizations, etc. Within each section of a
thematic literature review, it is important to discuss how the research relates to other studies
(how is it similar or different, what other studies have been done, etc.) as well as to demonstrate
how it relates to your own work. This is what the review is for; do not leave this connection out!
What is the Process?
During the first module, you will choose a topic to research from the list provided by the
instructor. After the topic has been chosen/provided, you will begin your project. Listed below is
a recommended outline of steps that will assist you in writing a thematically organized literature
review.
1. Annotated bibliography: Write a brief critical synopsis of each as you read articles,
books, etc. on your topic. After going through your reading list, you will have an abstract
or annotation of each source you read. Later annotations are likely to include more
references to other works since you will have your previous readings to compare, but, at
this point, the important goal is to get accurate critical summaries of each individual
work.
2. Thematic organization: Write some brief paragraphs outlining your categories that state
how, in general, the works in each category relate to each other, how the categories relate
to each other, and how the categories relate to your overall theme. Find common themes
in the works you read and organize the works into categories. Typically, each work you
include in your review can fit into 1 category or sub-theme of your main theme;
occasionally, a work can fit in more than 1 category (if each work you read can fit into all
the categories you list, you probably need to rethink your organization).
3. More reading: Due to the knowledge that you have gained in your readings, you now
have a better understanding of your topic and of the literature related to it. Perhaps you
have discovered specific researchers who are important to the field or research
methodologies you were not aware of. Look for more literature by those authors, on those
methodologies, etc. You may also be able to set aside some less relevant areas or articles
that you pursued initially. Integrate the new readings into your Literature Review draft.
Reorganize your themes and read more as appropriate.
4. Write individual sections: For each thematic section, use your draft annotations (it is
recommended to reread the articles and revise annotations, especially those you read
first) to write a section that discusses the articles relevant to that theme. Rather than
focusing your writing on each individual article, focus your writing on the theme of that
section and show how the articles relate to each other and to the theme. Use the articles as
evidence to support your critique of the theme rather than using the theme as an angle to
discuss each article individually.
5. Integrate sections: Now that you have the thematic sections, tie them together with an
introduction, conclusion, and some additions/ revisions in the individual sections in order
to demonstrate how they relate to each other and to your overall theme.
What Additional Points Must I Consider?
Page 2 of 4
BUSI 610
The following are some points to address when writing about specific works you are reviewing.
In dealing with a paper/argument/theory, you need to assess it (clearly understand and state the
claim) and analyze it (evaluate its reliability, usefulness, and validity). Look for the following
points as you assess and analyze the readings. You do not need to state them all explicitly, but
keep them in mind as you write your review:
•
Be specific and be succinct. Briefly state specific findings listed in an article, specific
methodologies used in a study, or other important points. Literature reviews are not the
place for long quotes or an in-depth analysis of each point.
• Be selective. You are attempting to reduce a lot of information into a small space.
Mention just the most important points (those most relevant to the review’s focus) in each
work you review.
• Is it a current article? How old is it? Have its claims, evidence, or arguments been
superseded by more recent work? If it is not current, is it important for historical
background?
• What specific claims are made? Are they stated clearly?
• What support is given for those claims?
o What evidence and what type (experimental, statistical, anecdotal, etc.) are
offered? Is the evidence relevant? Sufficient?
o What arguments are given? What assumptions are made and are they warranted?
• A word of caution: It is absolutely essential that you understand your article. If you do
not understand the article, do not use it. Also, do not depend on the abstract or the
conclusion for a full understanding of what the article says; you can often be misled.
How Do I Find the Literature?
Just as there are many avenues for the literature to be published and disseminated, there are
many avenues for searching for and finding the literature. There are, for example, a variety of
general and subject-specific indexes that list citations to publications (books, articles, conference
proceedings, dissertations, etc.). The Liberty University Online Student Library Services website
has links to the library catalog as well as many indexes and databases in which to search for
resources; it also provides you with subject guides that list resources appropriate for specific
academic disciplines. When you find appropriate books, articles, etc., look in its bibliographies
for other publications and also for other authors writing about the same topics. For research
assistance tailored to your topic, please email the Liberty University Online Librarian.
Tips on Identifying and Organizing Your Findings
There is no way to predict what themes you will find. The themes could include definitions,
topics, theories, agreements, and even disagreements in the literature. Design a descriptive code
word or a few phrases to define each theme (some people even use different colored highlighters
to assist them in organization). With 15 articles and 16 pages of content, you will likely have
anywhere between 4–6 major themes for your Literature Review: Final. However, it is highly
unlikely that each of the 15 articles that you read will contain all the themes that you have
identified. Below is an example of 10 hypothetical articles with 4 hypothetical themes.
Article
Theme
1
A
2
A, B
3
D
Page 3 of 4
BUSI 610
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
B
A, D
A, C
B, C
A, B, C
A, B, C, D
B, C
The chart is not very helpful except as a prelude to further organization. Your Literature Review
must be written thematically, not chronologically. You will not be reviewing one article after
another in your Literature Review; rather, you will be investigating the themes contained in those
articles. Therefore, the organization of your articles will look similar to the following example:
Theme
Articles Cited
A
1, 2, 5, 8, 9
B
2, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10
C
6, 7, 8, 9, 10
D
3, 5, 9
You may be pondering as to which theme will go first. Ultimately, the order of the themes is
your decision, but keep the thematic organization logical. The themes provide the subheadings
for the content of your Literature Review: Final Assignment; therefore, this is an efficient way
to organize and write your paper.
INSTRUCTIONS
What is the Final Format?
As previously stated, the Literature Review: Final Assignment will be written in current APA
format, must be a minimum of 16 pages (not including the title page, abstract, and references),
and must utilize at least 15 scholarly references. The final format must include the following:
• Title page;
• Abstract;
• Outline;
• Introduction (no longer than 1 page);
• Findings (a minimum of 13 pages);
• Conclusions, recommendations, and suggestions for further study (a minimum of 2
pages); and
• References that are current (less than 3 years) or important for historical background.
Please review the Literature Review: Final Grading Rubric before submission.
View the Literature Review: Final Resources section under the Literature Review: Final
page.
Note: Your assignment will be checked for originality via the Turnitin plagiarism tool.
Page 4 of 4
BUREAUCRATIC ORGANIZATIONS
Annotated Bibliography: Bureaucratic Organizations
Lemeshia Spears
Doctor of Business Administration, Liberty University
Author Note
Lemeshia Sherri Spears. I have no known conflict of interest to disclose. Correspondence
concerning this article should be addressed to Lemeshia Sherri Spears. Email:
lsspears1@liberty.edu.
1
BUREAUCRATIC ORGANIZATIONS
2
Annotated Bibliography
Monteiro, P., & Adler, P. S. (2022). Bureaucracy for the 21st century: Clarifying and expanding
our view of bureaucratic organization. Academy of Management Annals, 16(2), 427-475.
https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2019.0059
In ‘Bureaucracy for the 21st Century,’ Monteiro and Adler explore the evolving nature of
bureaucratic organizations. The study investigates how modern bureaucracies adapt to
contemporary challenges, contrasting traditional bureaucratic models with emerging trends.
Findings highlight the shift towards more flexible, network-based structures, emphasizing
innovation and adaptability. This source stands out in its comprehensive analysis compared to
other studies focusing more on specific aspects of bureaucracy. In my Literature Review, this
paper will be pivotal for framing the discussion on bureaucratic transformation, offering a broad
yet detailed perspective that supports the argument for modernization in organizational
structures.
Faik, I., Thompson, M., & Walsham, G. (2019). Designing for ICT-enabled openness in
bureaucratic organizations: Problematizing, shifting, and augmenting boundary work. Journal of
the Association for Information Systems, 20(6), 7. link
https://ore.exeter.ac.uk/repository/bitstream/handle/10871/35858/Designing%20for%20ICTEnabled%20Openness%20in%20Bureaucratic%20Organizations_.pdf?sequence=4
According to Faik et al. (2019), ICT integration can enhance openness in bureaucratic
organizations. It explores to what extent ICT could help redefine and move traditional borders in
the organization so that it would, among other things, make bureaucracy less stiff. The research
identifies ways ICT can augment and redefine the ‘boundary work’ in bureaucracies, enabling
more fluid and dynamic operational models. This source benefits your literature review by
BUREAUCRATIC ORGANIZATIONS
3
offering insights into practical solutions for modernizing bureaucratic structures. It complements
other sources by providing a unique perspective on leveraging technology to enhance flexibility
and innovation within traditionally rigid systems. In your review, this study can help shape the
argument that bureaucratic organizations can evolve by adopting new technologies to balance
their structured nature with the need for adaptability and creativity.
Stivers, C., & DeHart-Davis, L. (2022). Introduction to the symposium issue on reappraising
bureaucracy in the 21st century. Perspectives on Public Management and Governance, 5(2), 7783. link https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Leisha-DehartDavis/publication/360824545_Introduction_to_the_Symposium_Issue_on_Reappraising_Bureau
cracy_in_the_21st_Century/links/628d08ae345118162aa2f050/Introduction-to-the-SymposiumIssue-on-Reappraising-Bureaucracy-in-the-21st-Century.pdf
In their symposium introduction, stivers and DeHart-Davis (2022) delve into reevaluating
the Weberian bureaucracy’s role in contemporary public administration and management
(PA/PM). They reflect on Weber’s original views on bureaucracy, not as an ideal but an
inevitable result of democracy and capitalism, and its enabling role in modernity despite
concerns about its human impact. The article compares bureaucracy’s historic grounding with its
modern relevance and challenges, discussing topics like artificial intelligence in government,
gender inequality, and bureaucracy’s potential to adapt to new societal norms. This resource is
valuable for the literature review as it provides a nuanced understanding of the evolution and
current state of bureaucratic systems, aiding in shaping a balanced argument about their role in
modern governance.
BUREAUCRATIC ORGANIZATIONS
4
Suzuki, K., & Hur, H. (2020). Bureaucratic structures and organizational commitment: findings
from a comparative study of 20 European countries. Public Management Review, 22(6), 877907. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2019.1619813
Suzuki and Hur’s 2020 study focuses on the relationship between bureaucratic structures
and organizational commitment in 20 European countries. Using the theoretical framework of
social exchange theory, they examine how closed (traditional, structured) and open (flexible)
bureaucratic systems impact civil servants’ commitment. Their findings indicate that closed
systems are associated with higher continuance and normative commitment but not with
affective commitment. This suggests that while traditional bureaucratic systems may foster
loyalty and obligation, they do not necessarily enhance emotional attachment to the organization.
This study is significant for your literature review as it provides empirical evidence on the
psychological effects of bureaucratic structures on employees, offering a nuanced perspective on
the employee-organization relationship within different bureaucratic contexts.
Ding, F., Lu, J., & Riccucci, N. M. (2021). How bureaucratic representation affects public
organizational performance: A meta‐analysis. Public Administration Review, 81(6), 1003-1018.
link
https://fangda1224.github.io/pdf/How%20Bureaucratic%20Representation%20Affects%20Publi
c.pdf
Ding, Lu, and Riccucci’s 2021 study conducts a meta-analysis on how bureaucratic
representation affects public organizational performance. Analyzing 80 quantitative studies, they
find a positive association between representative bureaucracy and performance. This
relationship is more pronounced with specific demographic characteristics and in frontline
settings. The study reveals that representative bureaucracy, including active and symbolic
BUREAUCRATIC ORGANIZATIONS
5
representation, positively impacts organizational performance more than individual performance.
This source is significant for the literature review as it provides empirical evidence supporting
the effectiveness of representative bureaucracy in public organizations. This will aid in
discussing the impact of diversity and representativeness on organizational success.
Irwansyah, I. (2021). Adhocracy is a model for organizing government institutions to simplify
Indonesian bureaucracy. Jornal Borneo Administrator, 17(2), 241-258. link
http://www.samarinda.lan.go.id/jba/index.php/jba/article/download/832/343
Irwansyah (2021) examines adhocracy’s viability in simplifying Indonesian bureaucracy.
Through qualitative analysis, it explores adhocracy’s impact on government institutions, noting
its potential to streamline processes. Challenges like cultural resistance emerge. Compared to
traditional bureaucratic studies, it uniquely focuses on adhocracy, enriching the literature with
non-Western insights. This source augments my review by showcasing alternative organizational
models, highlighting adhocracy’s potential in bureaucratic reform. It offers practical implications
for policymakers and practitioners aiming to enhance organizational agility within bureaucratic
contexts.
Newman, J., Mintrom, M., & O’Neill, D. (2022). Digital technologies, artificial intelligence, and
bureaucratic transformation. Futures, p. 136, 102886. link
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0016328721001956
Newman et al. 2022 study explores how digital technologies and artificial intelligence
reshape bureaucracy. Their exploration highlights these advancements’ significant impact on
organizational structures and processes. Key findings indicate a boost in efficiency and decisionmaking due to these technologies. However, the study does not shy away from the more
challenging aspects, such as privacy concerns, accountability issues, and the potential for
BUREAUCRATIC ORGANIZATIONS
6
workforce displacement. What sets this research apart is its focus on the intersection of digital
technologies, AI, and bureaucratic transformation. It provides a well-rounded view of the current
challenges bureaucracies face as they adapt to new technologies. By incorporating insights from
this study, arguments about the role of technology in modernizing bureaucratic systems become
more robust, showcasing the transformative power of these tools while acknowledging the
accompanying challenges.
Mustafa, G., Solli-Sæther, H., Bodolica, V., Håvold, J. I., & Ilyas, A. (2022). Digitalization
trends and organizational structure: bureaucracy, ambidexterity, or post-bureaucracy? Eurasian
Business Review, 12(4), 671-694. link https://e-tarjome.com/storage/panel/fileuploads/2022-0803/1659498888_e16975.pdf
Mustafa et al. (2022) investigate how digitalization trends shape organizational structure,
focusing on bureaucracy, ambidexterity, and post-bureaucracy. Through two surveys targeting
digital natives and older-generation managers in Norwegian companies, they analyze structural
characteristics aligned with digitalization. Findings consistently support the relevance of postbureaucratic structures in leveraging digitalization’s benefits. The study is relevant to
understanding digital transformation and its influences on organizational design by external
trends. This study fills a gap in the literature on the intersection of digitalization and
organizational structure, bringing new insight into organizational challenges and strategies in
light of digital shifts. The sources add to the literature review both empirical and theoretical data
connected with the influence that digitalization has on organizational structure. It enhances my
argument by highlighting the importance of adopting flexible and adaptive structures to
effectively harness digital technologies’ potential.
BUREAUCRATIC ORGANIZATIONS
7
Rijshouwer, E., Uitermark, J., & de Koster, W. (2023). Wikipedia: a self-organizing
bureaucracy. Information, Communication & Society, 26(7), 1285-1302. link
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/1369118X.2021.1994633
Rijshouwer et al. (2023) investigate the evolution of Wikipedia as a paradigmatic
example of an open and self-organizing community. They explore Wikipedia’s power
concentration and bureaucratization mechanisms, drawing upon classical theories by Michels
and Weber. The study identifies the emergence of self-organizing bureaucratization, where
bureaucratic structures arise from bottom-up efforts to promote democratization and
accountability. Findings reveal alternating power concentration and diffusion processes,
challenging the notion of unilinear development. The study’s theoretical contributions shed light
on the complexities of organizational dynamics in digitally mediated communities. It compares
with other sources by offering a nuanced understanding of how bureaucratic tendencies manifest
within open communities. This source enriches the literature review by providing insights into
the challenges of self-organizing communities and their governance structures, shaping
arguments on organizational dynamics amidst digitalization.
Wellstead, A. M., & Biesbroek, R. (2022). Finding the sweet spot in climate policy: balancing
stakeholder engagement with bureaucratic autonomy. Current Opinion in Environmental
Sustainability, 54, 101155. link rd:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1877343522000070
Wellstead and Biesbroek (2022) explore the interplay between stakeholder engagement
and bureaucratic autonomy in climate change governance. They challenge the assumptions that
increasing stakeholder engagement leads to better outcomes and that government involvement is
top-down. The study emphasizes the importance of tailoring stakeholder engagement and
BUREAUCRATIC ORGANIZATIONS
8
bureaucratic autonomy to specific contexts, highlighting the concept of finding a “sweet spot”
between the two. By integrating insights from public management literature, they propose a
framework for identifying this sweet spot and suggest procedural policy instruments to navigate
it effectively. The findings underscore the need for a balanced approach to climate policy
formulation and implementation, considering both stakeholder involvement and bureaucratic
discretion. This source enriches the literature by integrating perspectives from public
management into climate change governance discussions, offering insights into optimizing
policy processes.
Cornell, A., Knutsen, C. H., & Teorell, J. (2020). Bureaucracy and growth. Comparative
Political Studies, 53(14), 2246-2282. link:
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0010414020912262
Cornell et al. (2020) examine the relationship between Weberian bureaucracy and
economic growth. They challenge the widely held assumption that a bureaucratic structure
characterized by merit-based recruitment and rule-following enhances economic development.
Utilizing data from the Varieties of Democracy project from 1789 to 2017, they find that
previous estimates overstated the relationship between Weberian bureaucracy and growth. While
their panel models report modest optimistic estimates, they are often statistically insignificant.
However, they note that any effect tends to operate in the short term and is more vital in recent
decades. Further evidence from the study suggests that further research should look at the exact
mechanisms of this relationship and its temporal dynamics. This source, therefore, bears critical
insights into an intricate relationship whereby bureaucracy relates to economic growth and, in so
doing, makes some of the most nuanced views in the entire governance and development
literature.
BUREAUCRATIC ORGANIZATIONS
9
Thomann, E., James, O., & Deruelle, T. (2024). Interventions to reduce bureaucratic
discrimination: a systematic review of empirical behavioral research. Public Management
Review, 1-28.. link: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Eva-Thomann2/publication/378780825_Interventions_to_reduce_bureaucratic_discrimination_a_systematic_re
view_of_empirical_behavioural_research/links/65ecc74cb1906066b288909c/Interventions-toreduce-bureaucratic-discrimination-a-systematic-review-of-empirical-behavioural-research.pdf
Thomann et al. (2024) conducted a systematic review of empirical behavioral research to
explore interventions to reduce bureaucratic discrimination at the street level. They focused on
the interactions between street-level bureaucrats and clients, recognizing their crucial role in
shaping perceptions of public services. The review identified several effective interventions,
including direct client outreach, anti-bias training, passive representation, and inclusive policies
and practices. These findings imply profound implications for tailoring interventions that reduce
discriminative behaviors and attitudes for street-level bureaucrats. The current research filled a
broad literature gap with insights into practical strategies for reducing discriminatory
bureaucratic processes and, in so doing, provides valuable evidence for policymakers and
practitioner competencies within the public administration sphere.
Blom‐Hansen, J., Baekgaard, M., & Serritzlew, S. (2021). How bureaucrats shape political
decisions: The role of policy information. Public Administration, 99(4), 658-678. link:
https://pure.au.dk/ws/portalfiles/portal/257254249/How_Bureaucrats_Shape_Political_Decisions
_Accepted_manuscript_2021.pdf
Blom‐Hansen et al. (2021) explored how bureaucrats influence political decisions by
providing policy information. They addressed the enduring dilemma of bureaucratic expertise
versus political control by investigating how bureaucrats shape political preferences. Based on
BUREAUCRATIC ORGANIZATIONS
10
the experimental designs and survey data of bureaucrats and politicians across countries provided
evidence to support the three fundamental mechanisms: bureaucrats are willing to use policy
information to influence their decisions; politicians are sensitive to the reliance on policy
information; framing affects political preferences. The study contributes to understanding the
dynamics of political-bureaucratic interactions, shedding light on the role of information in
policy decisions. This study remains helpful in understanding some of the complexities of
bureaucratic influence related to democratic governance.
Omoniyi, G. O., & Etim, E. E. (2017). Bureaucracy and organizational commitment in Lagos
state civil service. The International Journal of Business & Management. link:
https://gupea.ub.gu.se/bitstream/handle/2077/61438/gupea_2077_61438_1.pdf?sequence=1
Omoniyi and Etim (2017) examined the connection between bureaucracy and
organizational commitment among Lagos state civil servants. They assessed if civil servants
across different bureaucratic structures share commitment to their organizations. Using
organizational commitment dimensions—affective, continuance, and normative—they found that
closed bureaucratic systems correlated with higher overall commitment among senior public
managers. However, the type of commitment varied based on the bureaucratic system. This study
enriches understanding of how bureaucratic structures influence individual behavior and
attitudes. The literature review underscores the significance of individual-level factors in
bureaucratic systems and their impact on organizational performance. It enhances discussions on
bureaucratic effectiveness, shaping my argument about the complexity of bureaucratic
performance determinants.
BUREAUCRATIC ORGANIZATIONS
11
Geist, S. N., & Klievink, B. (2024). More than a digital system: How AI is changing the role of
bureaucrats in different organizational contexts. Public Management Review, 26(2), 379–398.
link: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/14719037.2022.2095001
Giest & Klievink (2024) explore how integrating AI-driven technologies in public
decision-making impacts the role definition of public bureaucrats across different organizational
contexts. Through comparative analysis of cases in the US and the Netherlands, they uncover
variations in innovation, organizational changes, and the redefinition of bureaucratic roles. In the
US case, AI implementation led to substantial changes in bureaucratic work, with automated
decision-making replacing human intervention. Conversely, in the Dutch case, changes were
more incremental, focusing on bureaucratic tasks rather than structural reorganization. This study
sheds light on the complex dynamics between technology adoption, organizational context, and
bureaucratic roles, providing valuable insights for understanding the implications of AI in public
sector innovation. It enhances the literature review by offering comparative insights into AI
system implementation and its impact on bureaucratic roles, contributing to discussions on the
transformative effects of technology in public administration.
12
BUREAUCRATIC ORGANIZATIONS
References
Monteiro, P., & Adler, P. S. (2022). Bureaucracy for the 21st century: Clarifying and expanding our
view of bureaucratic organization. Academy of Management Annals, 16(2), 427-475.
https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2019.0059
Faik, I., Thompson, M., & Walsham, G. (2019). Designing for ICT-enabled openness in bureaucratic
organizations: Problematizing, shifting, and augmenting boundary work. Journal of the
Association for Information Systems, 20(6), 7. link
https://ore.exeter.ac.uk/repository/bitstream/handle/10871/35858/Designing%20for%20ICTEnabled%20Openness%20in%20Bureaucratic%20Organizations_.pdf?sequence=4
Suzuki, K., & Hur, H. (2020). Bureaucratic structures and organizational commitment: findings from a
comparative study of 20 European countries. Public Management Review, 22(6), 877-907.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2019.1619813
Stivers, C., & DeHart-Davis, L. (2022). Introduction to the symposium issue on reappraising
bureaucracy in the 21st century. Perspectives on Public Management and Governance, 5(2), 7783. link https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Leisha-DehartDavis/publication/360824545_Introduction_to_the_Symposium_Issue_on_Reappraising_Bureau
cracy_in_the_21st_Century/links/628d08ae345118162aa2f050/Introduction-to-the-SymposiumIssue-on-Reappraising-Bureaucracy-in-the-21st-Century.pdf
Ding, F., Lu, J., & Riccucci, N. M. (2021). How bureaucratic representation affects public
organizational performance: A meta‐analysis. Public Administration Review, 81(6), 1003-1018.
link
https://fangda1224.github.io/pdf/How%20Bureaucratic%20Representation%20Affects%20Publi
c.pdf
BUREAUCRATIC ORGANIZATIONS
Irwansyah, I. (2021). Adhocracy is a model for organizing government institutions to simplify
Indonesian bureaucracy. Jurnal Borneo Administrator, 17(2), 241-258. link
http://www.samarinda.lan.go.id/jba/index.php/jba/article/download/832/343
Newman, J., Mintrom, M., & O’Neill, D. (2022). Digital technologies, artificial intelligence, and
bureaucratic transformation. Futures, p. 136, 102886. link
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0016328721001956
Mustafa, G., Solli-Sæther, H., Bodolica, V., Håvold, J. I., & Ilyas, A. (2022). Digitalization trends and
organizational structure: bureaucracy, ambidexterity, or post-bureaucracy? Eurasian Business
Review, 12(4), 671-694. link https://e-tarjome.com/storage/panel/fileuploads/2022-0803/1659498888_e16975.pdf
Rijshouwer, E., Uitermark, J., & de Koster, W. (2023). Wikipedia: a self-organizing
bureaucracy. Information, Communication & Society, 26(7), 1285-1302. link
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/1369118X.2021.1994633
Wellstead, A. M., & Biesbroek, R. (2022). Finding the sweet spot in climate policy: balancing
stakeholder engagement with bureaucratic autonomy. Current Opinion in Environmental
Sustainability, 54, 101155. link rd:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1877343522000070
Cornell, A., Knutsen, C. H., & Teorell, J. (2020). Bureaucracy and growth. Comparative Political
Studies, 53(14), 2246-2282. link:
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0010414020912262
Thomann, E., James, O., & Deruelle, T. (2024). Interventions to reduce bureaucratic discrimination: a
systematic review of empirical behavioral research. Public Management Review, 1-28.. link:
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Eva-Thomann-
13
BUREAUCRATIC ORGANIZATIONS
14
2/publication/378780825_Interventions_to_reduce_bureaucratic_discrimination_a_systematic_re
view_of_empirical_behavioural_research/links/65ecc74cb1906066b288909c/Interventions-toreduce-bureaucratic-discrimination-a-systematic-review-of-empirical-behavioural-research.pdf
Blom‐Hansen, J., Baekgaard, M., & Serritzlew, S. (2021). How bureaucrats shape political decisions:
The role of policy information. Public Administration, 99(4), 658-678. link:
https://pure.au.dk/ws/portalfiles/portal/257254249/How_Bureaucrats_Shape_Political_Decisions
_Accepted_manuscript_2021.pdf
Omoniyi, G. O., & Etim, E. E. (2017). Bureaucracy and organizational commitment in Lagos state civil
service. The International Journal of Business & Management. link:
https://gupea.ub.gu.se/bitstream/handle/2077/61438/gupea_2077_61438_1.pdf?sequence=1
Geist, S. N., & Klievink, B. (2024). More than a digital system: How AI is changing the role of
bureaucrats in different organizational contexts. Public Management Review, 26(2), 379–398.
link: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/14719037.2022.2095001
1
School of , Liberty University
Author Note
“Insert full name here. Include ORCID number in URL format if you have one.”
I have no known conflict of interest to disclose. “”
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to
“Insert Student’s Full Name” . Email:
2
Abstract
Keywords:
3
4
References