Max Weber's Methodology

Max Weber (1864-1920) argued against abstract

theory, and he favored an approach to sociological
inquiry that generated its theory from rich systematic,
empirical, historical research.

This approach required, first of all, an examination of

the relationships between, and the respective roles of,
history and sociology in inquiry.

Weber argued that sociology was to develop concepts

for the analysis of concrete phenomena, which would
allow sociologists to then make generalizations about
historical phenomena.

History, on the other hand, would use a lexicon of

sociological concepts in order to perform causal
analysis of particular historical events, structures, and
processes. In scholarly practice, according to Weber,
sociology and history are interdependent.
 Methodology…
Weber contended that understanding, or verstehen, was the
proper way of studying social phenomena. Derived from the
interpretive practice known as hermeneutics, the method of
verstehen strives to understand the meanings that human beings
attribute to their experiences, interactions, and actions.

Weber construed verstehen as a methodical, systematic, and

rigorous form of inquiry that could be employed in both macro-
and micro-sociological analysis.

Weber's greatest contribution to the conceptual arsenal of

sociology is known as the ideal type. The ideal type is basically a
theoretical model constructed by means of a detailed empirical
study of a phenomenon.

An ideal type is an intellectual construct that a sociologist may

use to study historical realities by means of their similarities to,
and divergences from, the model. Note that ideal types are not
utopias or images of what the world ought to look like.
 Ideal Type

 An ideal Type is an analytical construct that serves the

investigator as a measuring rod to ascertain similarities
as well as deviation in concrete cases.

 There are three types of ideal types:

1. Ideal types of historical particulars- Western society,
Protestant ethic, or modern capitalism
2. Ideal types of historical reality- Feudalism
3. Ideal type of particular kind of behaviour- All propositions
in economic theory
 Ideal Type

Weber's discussion of social action is an example of

the use of an ideal type. An ideal type provides the
basic method for historical- comparative study.

It is not meant to refer to the "best" or to some moral

ideal, but rather to typical or "logically consistent"
features of social institutions or behaviors.

The ideal type involves determining the features of a

social institution that would be present if the
institution were a logically consistent whole, not
affected by other institutions, concerns and interests.
Any social phenomenon has an ideal type, be it a brothel, a
house of worship or a market place.
It is a methodological device.

 The ideal type concept grew out of a creative

convergence of two type of other concepts, viz,
 Verstehen and Causal explanation

 Thus ‘ideal’ refers to an emphasis on particular aspects

of social life specified by the researcher, not to a value
as to whether something is “good” or “bad”.

 The difference between the sciences lies, then, in how

concepts are used to generate knowledge.
 Influence of Max Weber
Famous Works:
The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism 1905
Economy and Society, 1914
The Sociology of Religion, 1920
The Methodology of the Social Sciences, 1949
Legacy of Weber:
Weber worked in the antipositivist tradition which
believed the social sciences needed different methods
than the methods of the natural sciences because of
social action.
Weber made large contributions to the fields of the
sociology of religion and the sociology of government
Weber concentrated on the relationship between social
stratification and religion.
 Class, Status, Party
 Power- The chance of a man or of a number of men to
realize their own will in a social action even against the
resistance of others who are participating in the
action.
 Status groups are communities.

 The fate of such group is determined not by their

chances on the commodity or labour markets, however,
but by ‘a specific, positive or negative, social estimation
of honor.

 Parties are characterized by the strategic pursuit of goals

and the maintenance of staff capable of implementing
their objectives
 Class, Status, Party
Central to Weber's analysis of social stratification in
all its forms was the idea that we need to understand
two basic things:
Firstly, how societies are organized in hierarchical
systems of domination and subordination (in terms of
both individual and collective hierarchies).
Secondly, the significance of power in the
determination of social relationships based upon
domination and subordination.
According to Weber, the ability to possess power
derives from the individual's ability to control various
"social resources". These resources can be anything
and everything and might include things like:
Land, Capital, Social respect, Physical strength,
Intellectual knowledge, etc.
 Class, Status, Party
Weber developed a multidimensional theory of
stratification that incorporated class, status, and party.
Class is determined by one's economic or market
situation (i.e., life chances), and it is not a community
but rather a possible basis for communal action.
Status is a matter of honor, prestige, and one's style of
life.

Parties, according to Weber, are organized structures

that exist for the purposes of gaining domination in
some sphere of social life.

Class, status, and party may be related in many ways

in a given empirical case, which provides the
sociologist with a very sophisticated set of conceptual
tools for the analysis of stratification and power.
 Class, status and party
Three dimensional model of stratification:
Class, status and party
They are all like interest groups that can
fight both among themselves and against
each other.
Class: Marx’s class defined by ownership (or
lack of it) of the means of production.
Weber’s classes are defined by their position
on a market (struggle to control a place on
market): economic circulation rather than
economic production.
Dominant classes manage to achieve a
monopoly on lucrative market.
 “Class” is conceptualized in different ways
The practice of people locating themselves within a
class structure – rather than being “assigned” to
classes based on particular relations or attributes,
such as wealth or occupation – is often called
“subjective class identification”
– Survey methods typically rely on this
conceptualization of class
– Marx based his concept of class on the social
relations of production, property ownership
– Weber’s conceptualization is based more broadly
on “market situation”
Classes, status groups, and parties are
phenomena of the distribution of power within
a community.
 Typology of Law: Economy, Social and Political

 Weber and Marx in defining class:

1. Individuals share a particular causal facet of their lives

2. Economic drive is motivating force behind these facets
3. Class situation is essentially a market situation

 The genuine place of classes is within the economic

order,
the place of status group is within the social order.
But parties live in a house of power.
 Economically determined power and the status order

 Determination of class situation by market situation

 Social action flowing from class interest

 Types of class struggle- Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft

 Ethnic segregation and caste- Ethnic co-existence based

on mutual repulsion and disdain, allows each ethnic
community to consider its own honour.

 The caste structure brings about a social subordination

related to castes placed at the lower rung..
 Class situation
is ultimately 'market situation‘:
People meet “competitively for the purpose of
exchange” (exclusively of goods and services) in
order to create specific “life chances” (exclusively
income and living conditions).
Class is economically determined but refers broadly to
market situation
“Property” and “lack of property” is the basic division
Property owners divide into: rentiers and entrepreneurs
 rentier: an archaic word for asset owners or
creditors, i.e., individuals who gain income from
assets (interest, rent, dividends, or capital gains)
rather than labor
Propertyless divide into: unskilled workers, skilled
laborers, professionals, etc.
Distinctions between the classical Marxist and
Weberian theories of class:
(1) Marx conceptualizes class as an objective
structure of social positions, whereas
Weber’s analysis of class is constructed in
the form of a theory of social action.
2) Marx holds to a unidimensional conception
of social stratification and cleavage, with class
relations being paramount, whereas Weber
holds to a multidimensional view in which class
relations intersect with and are often
outweighed by other (non-class) bases of
association, notably status and party.
 Distinction....
(3) In Marx’s theory, the essential logic of
class relations and class conflict is one of
exploitation, where political and ideological
domination are interpreted as merely the
means by which exploitation is secured,
whereas for Weber domination is conceived as
an end in itself, with its own independent force
and logic.
4) For Marx, classes are an expression of the
social relations of production, whereas Weber
conceptualizes classes as common positions
within the market.
 Distinction.....
(5)For Marx class is the single most important
division around which social groups organize and
contend for political power. Class struggle is
therefore the primary vehicle of social change.

(6) For Weber, the importance of class divisions is

historically variable and contingent. Class
relations coexist with other forms of oppression
and other bases of association that are
independent of class and potentially no less
important for the organization of particular
societies or the transition between types of
society.
 Distinction.....

For Marx, relations of political and ideological

domination are secondary in the sense that they arise
either as a means of securing the conditions for
exploitation (as in the laws that guarantee the rights
of private property), as a means of realizing or
intensifying the degree of exploitation (as in the
various forms of capitalist domination over workers at
the point of production).

For Weber, relations of domination are in no sense

subordinate to the goal of exploitation. Individuals
sometimes seek dominance over others as a way of
exploiting their labor, but they also pursue it for the
social prestige it entails .
 Class struggle

Caused not by members of the same class, but social

action among members of different classes
Social actions that directly determine the class
situation of worker & entrepreneur:
– Labor market
– Commodities market
– Capitalistic enterprise
Class struggles have shifted from:
– Consumption credit
– Competitive struggles in the commodity market
– Wage disputes in the labor market
 Status Privileges-Stratification
 Artistic and literary activity is considered degrading work
as soon as it is exploited for income…

 Economic conditions and effects of status stratification-

Market and its processes knows no personal
distinctions: ‘functional’ interests dominate it. It know
nothing of honour.

 Classes are stratified according to their relations to the

production and acquisition of goods.

 Status groups are stratified according to the principles of

their consumption of goods represented by special styles
of life.
 Ethnic segregation and caste
Status groups can evolve into closed castes
– Status distinctions are then guaranteed not
merely by conventions and laws, but also by
religious sanctions
– this generally happens only when underlying
differences are said to be "ethnic"
Ethnic segregation grown into a caste transforms the
horizontal and unconnected coexistences of ethnically
segregated groups into a vertical social system of
domination and subordination.
Ethnic communities are based on a belief of
commonality rather than any objective “racial
differences”.
The relationship between ethnicity/race and social
status is variable.
•Parties- reside in the sphere of power. Their action is
oriented toward the acquisition of social power.

 Party oriented social action always involved association.

 For it is always directed toward a goal which is striven

for in a planned manner.

 A party always struggles for political control ( Herrschaft)

 Its organization too is frequently strict and ‘authoritarian’

 Means attaining power- money, social influence,

suggestion….
 Class, status and party

Parties: struggle among political factions: politicians

have their own interests, not reducible to the
struggles of economic classes or status groups.

Weapons of the state: military, police, legitimacy.

A successful state makes most people within its

borders feel they are members of a single status
groups, the nation.

Legitimacy: Hereditary, charisma, rational-legal.

 Weber: Social Closure
Mechanisms provide ways to close off opportunities to
other classes, status groups, or individuals.

Most market relationships are open.

Relationships are closed for several reasons:

– To maintain quality
– Protect certain groups against a shrinking
number of advantages in relation to consumption
– Attenuation of opportunities for acquisition
necessitates social closure to maintain, or
enhance, position.

Credentialism is one method of social closure.

 Elite Theorists: Gaetano Mosca "The Ruling Class”

Main point?
– There are two classes of people, the Rulers and
the Ruled.

Ruling Class-
a. Few
b. Perform all political functions,
c. Collects and enjoys power.

Ruled Class
a. Numerous
b. Controlled by legal means
c. Give power to Rulers (no choice)
 Mosca….

The ruling class uses legal means (which they

control) to codify their power .

While the ruled might one day revolt, there is

always a minority that will emerge to rule
after a ruler is deposed.

Mosca views the Ruling Class in legal terms

now and presents varying ways people may
ascend to the ruling class. (war, birth,
religious elders, land, etc).
 C. Wright Mills “The Power Elite”
“Those political, economic, and military circles which
as an intricate set of overlapping cliques share
decisions…in so far as national events are decided,
the power elite are those who decide them.”

In America, since there was not a feudal period the

bourgeoisie were able to monopolize prestige, power,
and wealth. However, they also tend to deny that they
hold power, and instead insist they are a scattered
bunch of individuals. Regardless, the power elite
influence the ways society views religion, education,
and the family.

“History is merely one thing after another; history is

meaningless in that it is not the realization of any
determinate plot.”
 Ideal Types: Domination
This social domain concerns the reasons why persons
attribute legitimacy to commands and their motives
for rendering obedience.

It refers to the probability that a certain group of

individuals will orient their social action to produce
commands, and that another group will direct their
social action to its obedience.

Weber thereafter identifies three major ‘principles of

legitimation’— rational-legal, traditional, and
charismatic — able to orient meaningful social action
 Ideal Types: Law
The orientation of social action through laws involves
an attribution of social validation since a legal order
is believed to bind individuals and groups.

This element of legitimacy directs action, Weber

insists, though it does so in combination with a
further component central to the law domain: legal
statutes are enforced by a specialized staff in
possession of coercive powers, whether the
patriarch’s clan or state’s modern functionaries.
 Ideal Types: Status Groups

This domain refers to action oriented to group-

specific consumption patterns, socialization
practices, conventions, values, and styles of life.
Accordingly, unique to each group are (positive or
negative) notions of social honor, esteem, and
prestige.

Moreover, each status group places restrictions to

some degree on social interaction with unequal
status. Specific to this type are action-orientations
that protect social distance and cultivate
exclusiveness.
 Status Situation
Any quality shared by a plurality of people can
be turned into a mark of status (an imposed
hierarchical ranking people as inferior and
superior (stratification).
Examples: Skin of color, sex, religion,
language, etc.

Weber here is obviously critical of Marxists

view according to which social classes, and
working class in particular, constitute
communities, and hence leads to Marx’s
motto “working class of the world unite!’
 The components of status
1. Specific style of life, e.g., habits of taste, which
can be expected from those who wish to belong
to the group, such as strict submission to the
fashion. Submission leads to recognition.
2. Restriction of social intercourse, social exclusion
and social distance.These restrictions may confine
normal marriages to within the status circle and may
lead to complete endogamous closure.
3. Beside distance and exclusiveness, we find all sorts
of material monopolies.
The privilege of wearing special costumes, of eating
special dishes taboo to others, the right to pursue
certain non-professional dilettante artistic practices,
e.g. to play certain musical instruments.
Types of social The basis of social stratification.
Stratification ( how people are ranked)
(social ranking)

Class Life chances

Status Social Prestige

Party (power) Social Influence

Types Examples of social rankings
Class Upper, Middle, and Lower Class, Owners of
factories, Workers, skilled workers,
Unskilled workers

Status Ethnic and racial groups, Gender (men vs.

women)

Party Members and leaders of political parties,

(Power) trade unions, gangs vs. unorganized
citizens
Types The Basis of social ranking

Class Property,
Skill (can offer services, e.g. teaching, office work,
etc.)
Status Ascribed (given to) by social customs and
Conventions (arbitrarily) to any quality shared by
group of people, to which a positive or negative,
social estimation is attributed (stigma, etc.)

Party May be quite varied, ranging from naked violence

(Power) to canvassing for votes with means of money,
social influence, the force of speech, and so on to.
--Through the use of a staff
Types The locus of stratification
i.e., where it takes place
Class Market economy(people compete with
each other for their share of income)

Status Society (except the market) People are

included/excluded based on life style or
restrictions on social intercourse such as
marriage.

Party Everywhere! In particular in Political

(Power) institutions
 Social Carriers
Weber insists that repeated and thereafter patterned
social action always occurs within groups that he
basically divides in strata, classes, and
organizations.

Thus, the reproduction of values, ideas, interests,

traditions, and currents of thought of every
imaginable variety presupposes the existence of a
bounded group of social carriers:

“ The patrimonial bureaucracy and the literati

stratum in China remained the major carriers of
Confucianism for more than 2,000 years, and the
Brahmins carried Hinduism in India for more than a
millennium’.
 Power
“The internal cohesiveness of groups does not alone account
for their capacity as social carriers; pivotal also is their
possession of a certain minimum of power or authority. Only
then will the patterned action carriers imply successfully
oppose the patterned action carried by other groupings” .

Power (definition): "the probability that one actor in a social

relationship will be in a position to carry out his will
despite resistance, regardless of the basis on which this
probability rests” (E&S, 53). (p. 152, Theory of Social &
Economic Organization).

Authority (definition): belief in the legitimacy of the exercise

of power.
 Power is social
1. Power is always social.
2. Power is relational.
3. Power is a social process.
4. Power is a social strategy.
Power is not neither natural (pre-social) nor essential
(a-social).

Features associated with domination are obedience,

interest, belief, and regularity. Weber notes that
“every genuine form of domination implies a
minimum of voluntary compliance, that is, an interest
(based on ulterior motives or genuine acceptance) in
obedience”.
 Power as Domination
In popular imagination, power tends to be viewed in one of
two ways, both extreme. The first is totemic and tactical (how
to get ahead at the tribe or the office, to win friends and
influence people). The other is epic and amorphous (the fate
of markets, of vast global events and forces that seem beyond
anyone's control, but especially yours).

Power is both these things, and more. It is best understood in

terms of command and control. It is either the capacity to
make others do as you wish (the command function) or to
reorder the environment around you (the control function).

Weber defines then domination "as the probability that

certain specific commands (or all commands) will be
obeyed by a given group of persons” (E&S, 53).
 Domination
Features associated with domination are
obedience, interest, belief, and regularity.
Weber notes that “every genuine form of domination
implies a minimum of voluntary compliance, that is,
an interest (based on ulterior motives or genuine
acceptance) in obedience”.

Examples of dominance could include parent-child

relationships, employer-employee, teacher-student,
domination within the family, political rule that is
generally accepted and obeyed, or the relation
between a priest and his church members.
 Relations of Power/ Domination
Power (or Domination) involves the following relations:

Voluntary compliance or obedience. Individuals are

not forced to obey, but do so voluntarily. Those who obey
do so because they have an interest in so doing, or at least
believe that they have such an interest.

Belief in the legitimacy of the actions of the dominant

individual or group.

Compliance or obedience is not haphazard or associated

with a short-term social relationship, but is a sustained
relationship of dominance and subordination so
that regular patterns of inequality are established.
 Power Structure
When dominance continues for a considerable period
of time, it becomes a structured phenomenon, and the
forms of dominance become the social structures of
society.

Temporary or transient types of power are not usually

considered to be dominance. This definition of
domination also eliminates those types of power that
are based on sheer force, because force may not lead
to acceptance of the dominant group or voluntary
compliance with its orders.

Weber develops a three-pole system made from

power, force and discipline. While force and discipline
don’t really need an agreement on the content of an
order, power is an agreement on the legitimacy of the
(social- or law-) order of power.
 Legitimate Power

According to Weber, the bases of legitimation

of power turning it into a lasting authority are:

– custom, tradition (as for a Queen)

– affect; likeness (as for a mother)
– material interests (as for receiving a
salary)
– ideal motive (as in religion)
 Custom-Tradition
When and where people follows uniform types of conduct,
Weber refers to this simply as usage (E&S, 29). Long
established usages become customs. These can emerge
within a group or society on the basis of continued
interaction, and require little or no enforcement by any
specific group.

A stronger degree of conformity is convention, where the

compliance is not just voluntary or customary, but where
some sort of sanctions may exist for those who do not
comply with convention. These may be informal sanctions,
leading to mild disapproval, or they may be strong sanctions
associated with discipline or ostracism.

Usage and custom often become the basis of rules, and

violation of these may ultimately have some sanctions
applied.
 Convention-Law
When and where convention is adopted by an individual
or a group that has the legitimate capacity and duty to
impose sanctions, the convention can become law.

This can begin to create a legal order where a group

assumes the task of applying sanctions to punish
transgressions, for example, a clan, priesthood, or simply
elders.

When and where this can be applied over a territorial

unit, with order safeguarded by threat of physical force,
then this can create a political order: the threat and
application of physical force by an administrative staff
with legal, administrative, military, or police functions.
 The Types of Legitimate Domination
Three ‘Ideal Types’:

 Traditional Authority: Resting on an established belief in

the sanctity of immemorial traditions.

 Charismatic Authority: Resting on devotion to the

exceptional sanctity, heroism or exemplary character of
an individual person.

 Rational –Legal Authority: Resting on a belief in the

legality of enacted rules and the right of those elevated
to authority under such rules to issue commands.
 Traditional Authority
 The masters are designated according to traditional rules
and are obeyed because of their traditional status.

The commands of such a person are legitimized in one of

two ways:
 Partly in terms of traditions

 Partly in terms of the master’s discretion

Thus there is a double sphere:

 That the action which is bound to specific traditions;

 That of action which is free of specific rules.

 Traditional Authority
This is the type of authority where the traditional rights of a
powerful and dominant individual or group are accepted, or at least
not challenged, by subordinate individuals based in:
(i) religious, sacred, or spiritual forms,
(ii) well established and slowly changing culture, or
(iii) tribal, family, or clan type structures.

The dominant individual could be a priest, clan leader, family head,

some other patriarch, or a dominant elite might govern.

In many cases, traditional authority is buttressed by culture such as

myths or connection to the sacred, symbols such as a cross or flag,
and by structures and institutions which perpetuate this traditional
authority.

In Weber's sublime words, this traditionalist domination "rests

upon a belief in the sanctity of everyday routines.
 Types of traditional authority
(i) gerontocracy or rule by elders; (ii) patriarchalism
and patrimonialism; (iii) feudalism.
Patriarchalism is the most important type of
domination legitimated by tradition. Patriarchalism
means the authority of the father, the husband, the
house senior, the sib elder over the members of the
household and sib; the rule of the master and patron
over bondsmen, serfs, freed men; of the patrimonial
lord and sovereign prince over the 'subjects.'
Such authority could govern a family, household, clan,
or a whole society. The leader may emerge naturally
(on the basis of age), or be selected through adherence
to traditional principles. As long as this method of
selection is accepted by others in the group, the rule of
the patriarch's authority will be accepted.
 Patrimonialism
Weber considers a more modern form of traditional
authority to be patrimonialism, or rule by an
administration or military force that are purely
personal instruments of a ‘master’. At the level of the
household or family, patriarchy may continue, but
within a clan, gang or larger group, it may be
necessary for the patriarch to rely on some form of
administration.

While the patriarch still holds power, and can often

exercise this power with no limits, at other times the
power of the patriarch may be limited by the
administrative apparatus, by the need to rely on
others to carry out orders, etc.
 Feudalism
A third type of traditional authority is feudalism,
which Weber presents as a more routinized form of
rule, with "contractual relationships between leader
and subordinate" .

Traditional authority is a means by which inequality is

created and preserved. Where no challenge to the
authority of the traditional leader or group is made,
then the leader is likely to remain dominant.

Status honor is accorded to those with traditional

forms of power and this status helps to maintain
dominance. Weber finally stresses that traditional
authority blocks the development of rational or legal
forms of authority.
 Charismatic Authority
 It is recognition on the part of those subject to authority
which is decisive for the validity of charisma.

 An organized group subject to charismatic authority will

be called a charismatic community.

 Charismatic authority repudiates the past, and is in this

sense a specifically revolutionary force.

 The only basis of legitimacy for it is personal charisma so

long as it is proved….
 It can not remain stable, but becomes either
traditionalized or rationalized, or a combination of both.
 Charismatic Authority
Weber defines charismatic authority as "resting on
devotion to the exceptional sanctity, heroism or exemplary
character of an individual person, and of the normative
patterns or order revealed or ordained by him".

That is, charisma is a quality of an individual personality

that is considered extraordinary, and followers may
consider this quality to be endowed with supernatural,
superhuman, or exceptional powers or qualities. Whether
such powers actually exist or not is irrelevant; the fact that
followers believe that such powers exist is what is
important.

Weber considers charisma to be a driving and creative

force which surges through traditional authority and
established rules. The sole basis of charismatic authority is
the recognition or acceptance of the claims of the leader by
the followers.
 Legal Authority : The Pure Type
That any given legal norm may be established by
agreement or by imposition…

That every body of law consists essentially in a

consistent system of abstract rules…

That thus typical person in authority, the ‘superior’, is

himself subject to an impersonal order…..

That the person who obeys authority does so, as it is

usually stated, only in his capacity as a ‘member’ of
the organization….
 Legal or Rational Authority
This is authority (or legitimate domination) resting on
"rational grounds – resting on a belief in the legality
of enacted rules and the right of those elevated to
authority under such rules to issue commands".

There are various ways for reaching legal authority

through systems of convention, laws and regulation.
The development of law in the West led to a rule of
law, written legal codes, legal rights and rules, and the
"professionalized administration of justice by
persons who have received legal training formally
and systematically”.
 Criteria
A clearly defined hierarchy of offices.

Each office has a clearly defined sphere of

competence in the legal sense.

Candidates are selected on the basis of technical

qualifications. They are appointed, not elected.

Fixed salaries-The salary scale is graded…

It constitutes a career based on system of

promotion…
 Social Struggles
The rational-legal form of authority may be challenged
by those who are subordinate. This challenge is
generally unlikely to result in dramatic changes in the
nature of the system very quickly (E&S, 38-39).

According to Weber, such struggles don’t need to be

exclusively class based, and can have an ethnic or
nationalist ground, thus becoming political struggles
(E&S, 39).
 Future: bureaucracies
In spite of social or political struggles, Weber
envisaged the future as one where rational-legal types
of authority would become more dominant
worldwide.

Although a charismatic leader or movement might

emerge, the leading tendency is for organizations to
become more routinized, rational and bureaucratic.

It is in this sense that legal authority can be

interpreted since in modern societies, authority is in
large part exercised on the basis of professional-legal
bureaucracies (E&S, 987).
 Bureaucracy

In order to study these organizations, both

historically and in contemporary society,
Weber developed the characteristics of an
ideal-type bureaucracy:
 Hierarchy of authority
 Impersonality
 Written rules of conduct
 Promotion based on achievement
 Specialized division of labor
 Efficiency
 Bureaucracy

Operations of the organizations are characterized

by impersonal rules that explicitly state duties,
responsibilities, standardized procedures and
conduct of office holders.

Offices are highly specialized . Appointments to

these offices are made according to specialized
qualifications rather than ascribed criteria.

All of these ideal characteristics have one goal, to

promote the efficient attainment of the
organization's goals.
 Bureaucracy

The bureaucratic coordination of the action of

large numbers of people has become the dominant
structural feature of modern societies.

It is only through this organizational device that

large-scale planning and coordination, both for the
modern state and the modern economy, become
possible.

The consequences of the growth in the power and

scope of these organizations is key in
understanding our world.
 Bureaucracy
 Attributes:
1. Principle of fixed and official jurisdictional areas

2. Principle of office hierarchy and of levels of

gradation

3. A division of labour based on specialized functions

4. A system of written documents (files)

5. Management based on thorough and expert

training
 Office Holding as a vocation

Appointment of employer by higher officials, rather

than by election

Rank as the basis of regular salary

Bureaucracy develops the more perfectly, the more it

is ‘dehumanized’.

It offers the attitudes demanded by external

apparatus of modern culture in the most favourable
combinations
 Development of Modern Bureaucracy
Development of money economy through a stable
system of taxation.

The great state and mass party are the classic soil for
bureaucratization.

Qualitative changes of administrative tasks

Technical superiority of bureaucracy over any other

form of organization.

The personally detached and strictly objective expert.

 Future: bureaucracies
In spite of social or political struggles, Weber
envisaged the future as one where rational-legal types
of authority would become more dominant worldwide.

Although a charismatic leader or movement might

emerge, the leading tendency is for organizations to
become more routinized, rational and bureaucratic.

It is in this sense that legal authority can be

interpreted since in modern societies, authority is in
large part exercised on the basis of professional-legal
bureaucracies (E&S, 987).