Organisational Management: Metaphors, Bureaucracy, Flexibility

This essay delves into the multifaceted realm of organisational management, exploring key concepts and theories. It begins by examining Morgan's metaphors, which view organisations as technical instruments or living beings, and how these perspectives apply to the factory system and scientific management. The essay then discusses organisational bureaucracy, analyzing Weber's rational bureaucratic model and its elements, as well as the contributions of Merton, Gouldner, Blau, and Selznick. Furthermore, it explores Chester Barnard's notion of a common moral purpose in organisations, emphasizing the importance of cooperation, communication, and a shared ethical framework. Finally, the essay addresses the concept of organisational flexibility, highlighting the balance between economies of scale and scope, and the need for specialisation alongside adaptability in modern organisations. The essay provides a comprehensive overview of these crucial aspects of organisational management, supported by relevant references.

Running head: ORGANISATIONAL MANAGEMENT
ORGANISATIONAL MANAGEMENT
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:
Author Note:

1ORGANISATIONAL MANAGEMENT
Changes to the Factory System by implementation of the Scientific Management Principles
The metaphors that are used by Morgan perceive organisations as a technical instrument,
that is used to achieve some specific outcome. Both the humans and equipment of an
organisation work together in mechanical efficiency to attain a goal (Morgan 1980). Morgan’s
metaphors view organisations as living beings, which need resources to stay alive, unlike other
books on organisation that take its existence for granted. Just like living organisms, the key
instruments of an organisation have to survive based on different resources.
Some of these metaphors are applicable to the factory system in a very basic and primal
manner: they exist even without any significant knowledge about their existence and they
perform their tasks even if they are not assigned to them with any proper knowledge about their
functions. Like a living organism, the organisation is considered to be a single entity that
functions from a basic and core area, which processes the information and takes key decisions on
behalf of the entire organisation (Örtenblad, Trehan and Putnam 2016).
On the other hand, these metaphors can also be applied after the implementation of the
scientific management in order to make sure that they are used in the most efficient way possible
that would be best serving for the organisation (Morgan 1980). With knowledge on the different
key attributes and parts of the organisation, there would also be detailed ideas about which of
these parts or entities of the organisation helps in which specific operations of the company. This
would be tremendously helpful when the organisation has to focus on something specific and
boost their operations in one particular field.
Morgan’s metaphors are essential in the sense that they give valuable insight into the
different factors that make up the entire operations of the organisation and also give ideas

2ORGANISATIONAL MANAGEMENT
regarding which of these aspects can be used in the right manner to enhance particular
organisational operations.
Organisational Bureaucracy
There are many debates regarding the rational bureaucratic model of the organisation.
This model is built on the previously discussed machine metaphor that has been put forth by
Morgan in 1997. The current model gives specific structural arrangements and administrative
activities that are focused upon attainment of goals and objectives of the orgnaisation (Burrell
and Morgan 2017). The suggestions that are given by this model talks about how to effectively
coordinate and control manual human labour.
Weber’s theory of rational bureaucracy is one of the biggest influences on organisational
theories and management practices. He identified six central elements in bureaucracy, which are:
a clearly defined idea about the division of labour and authority, a sense of a prevailing hierarchy
within the organisation, well defined and written guidelines which lay down the criteria for
performances, recruitment criteria, office holdings on vocational courses, and, duties of different
positions (Mori 2017). These elements defined by Weber help a bureaucratic organisation to
decide how to recruit, distribute and control the human resources that are available.
Weber also suggests several characteristics that the organisation should be possessing:
the organisation should have clearly defined goals which can be achieved through a formal
structure; efficiency has to be enhanced through following the organisational policies;
organisational behaviour, both within the company and the industry, should be shaped by the
formal structure (Burrell and Morgan 2017).

3ORGANISATIONAL MANAGEMENT
However, there is a serious debate about his arguments on his definition and ideas about
authority. According to Weber, a legitimate bureaucratic authority is the basis of any
organisational competency. The amount of argument against this is no less. It is a known fact
that those in the place of authorities are not always the most competent ones.
There are elaborate and detailed ideas about the functions, dynamics and purpose of a
bureaucratic organisation. Robert Merton has given details about the personalities that a
bureaucratic organisation possesses and how do those shape its functions.
Alvin Gouldner has given ideas pertaining to the different patterns of an industrial
bureaucracy. Some of these forms include mock bureaucracy, representative bureaucracy and
bureaucracy oriented around punishment.
Peter Blau has given proper ideas regarding the dynamics of organisational bureaucracy.
His studies, conducted in 1955, of federal and bureaucratic agencies have yielded similar results
to the inferences that were made by Gouldner. Blau took the conclusions of gouldner and gave it
a functional approach, which were solely focused upon the consequences of the actions and
routines of organisational bureaucracy (Mori 2017). His study tried to find if bureaucracies
helped an organisation to achieve its objectives and also whether it helped to produce the desired
organisational behaviour. Like Metron, he believed that bureaucratic procedures often give
unexpected results and result in consequences that were not anticipated before.
Philip Selznick has often been considered as the authoritative person who has been
looked up to by many when it comes to studying the bureaucracy in an organisation (Burrell and
Morgan 2017). His 1949 study of the Tennessee Valley Authority gives further evidences on the

4ORGANISATIONAL MANAGEMENT
role that human actions have in producing deviations from attaining goals through formal
rational bureaucracy.
Barnard’s notion of a Common Moral Purpose
Chester Bernard is one of the major influences that has shaped the ideas and studies on
organisational bureaucracy, and everything it encompasses: from the reason of its existence and
how may it influence and shape the operations of the organisations, as well as changing and
deciding its behaviour.
Bernard viewed organisations as cooperative systems. He defined organisations as
entities and structures that had complex biological, physical, personal and social components.
These elements are all in a specific systematic relationship (Lefkowitz 2017). According to
Bernard, humans get into arrangements that are cooperative in nature simply because they cannot
they cannot achieve those alone and has to be helped by others to fulfil the collective objectives.
His viewings of the organisations were in biological terms that are similar to living
organisms that are always trying to survive in a hostile environment. He further acknowledged
the fact that organisations are not self-sufficient and needs to rely upon different resources that
are available from outside environment that both facilitate as well as restricts the action s and
functions of the organisation. For example, an organisation stands upon the basic pillars of
capital, labour, equipment and resources to function (Lefkowitz 2017). On the other hand, the
organisation also needs science and technologies that help it to achieve its goals and also restrict
what can be achieved, depending on the technology that is currently available.
Even though the goals of an organisation are set by the higher authorities, the willingness
to achieve those come from the lower levels of the organisational hierarchy. Authority of an

5ORGANISATIONAL MANAGEMENT
organisation is only realised when the employees in the lower tiers accept and comply to the
authoritative figures. An organisation is a purposefully coordinated entity and system of
communication that links all the participants.
Even though some of Bernard’s views are based on rationality, his insistence on non-
material, informal, moral and inter-personal basis for cooperation sets him apart from the rational
bureaucracy advocates of an organisational hierarchy (By, Armenakis and Burnes 2015). He
believed that an organisation is only successful if a common and collective purpose within the
organisation can be formed, that is also morally binding for the participants of the organisation.
This has to be undertaken and executed by the executive of the organisation who is responsible
for creating the moral codes for the participants. It must be remembered that this notion of the
organisational success has been criticised as being moral imperialism. Still, Bernard accepts the
fact that this overriding purpose can be discarded if the very existence of the organisation is
threatened.
Even after understanding and emphasising on the moral aspects of organisational success,
Bernard still acknowledges the need for environment as being the most important ingredient for
the success of an organisation.
Managing the operations and organisational flexibility
An organisation has to maintain a kind of flexibility that would help the organisation to
achieve a balance in all its operations. An organisation has to ensure that a balance between the
conomies of scale and economies of scope is attained, so that an overall all-encompassing
organisational operation can be established. In the modern day organisations, the management
always try to create a decorum that would make the organisation both specializing in certain

6ORGANISATIONAL MANAGEMENT
aspects and yet ensure that the organisation is flexible in nature, which would help the company
to execute even those tasks which are not the company’s forte (Nandakumar, Jharkharia and Nair
2014). Specialisations based on assembly lines reduces the need for technical control and direct
supervision. Ford Motors was the first company to have successfully used this model to increase
their productivity, hence dubbing the model as Fordism. However, Fordism failed to capture the
basic essence of the diversifications that had to be established in the organisation and hence, new
models emerged that facilitated in the operational balance of organisations. Achieving both
economies of scale and economies of scope are vital for the company to make sure that the
functions of the organisation both maximizes its profits through reduced costs and also expand
the organisations operations to every potential sector, that can proof beneficial for the company.
When mass produced components or commodities can be produced at a lower cost and better
profit can be generated, it yields significant economies to scale, which is essential for
organisations as they have to continue doing business in the industry in the long term. Economies
of scope refers to the condition of the organisations which help organisations to undertake
different tasks and execute them successfully, making it easier to expand to new sectors
(Sopelana, Kunc and Hernáez 2014). Both of these two aspects have to be balanced by the
organisation, if it wants to survive in a sector.

7ORGANISATIONAL MANAGEMENT
References
Burrell, G. and Morgan, G., 2017. Sociological paradigms and organisational analysis:
Elements of the sociology of corporate life. Routledge.
By, R.T., Armenakis, A.A. and Burnes, B., 2015. Organizational change: A focus on ethical
cultures and mindfulness.
Lefkowitz, J., 2017. Ethics and values in industrial-organizational psychology. Taylor &
Francis.
Morgan, G., 1980. Paradigms, metaphors, and puzzle solving in organization
theory. Administrative science quarterly, pp.605-622.
Mori, G.T., 2017. Examining Hindrance of Bureaucracy on Management Innovation for
Organizations. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social
Sciences, 7(4), pp.601-607.
Nandakumar, M.K., Jharkharia, S. and Nair, A.S. eds., 2014. Organisational flexibility and
competitiveness. Springer Science & Business Media.
Örtenblad, A., Trehan, K. and Putnam, L.L. eds., 2016. Exploring Morgan’s Metaphors: Theory,
Research, and Practice in Organizational Studies. SAGE Publications.
Sopelana, A., Kunc, M. and Hernáez, O.R., 2014. Towards a dynamic model of organisational
flexibility. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 27(2), pp.165-183.