This chapter examines the psychological drivers of bureaucracy and the ways to prevent bureaucracy. It finds that bureaucracy is a recurring theme in most organizations (Janssen, Wimmer, & Deljoo, 2015). The reason it is common in many companies, even in non-bureaucratic organizations, is that it is highly beneficial in some circumstances. It can increase work satisfaction and reduce the feelings of alienation and stress. Despite having numerous benefits, the downsides of bureaucracy outweigh the upsides.
The first driver of bureaucracy is habits. Habits are formed through the repetition of certain behaviors. The first time one encounters a situation, they may not know what to do. But after a few times of practice, they respond automatically to learned behavior. The behavioral patterns one repeats often become automatic when faced with a similar situation. Because habits require minimum cognitive effort, most responses to situations are habitual. The just stated explains in part why breaking the bureaucratic mindset is very difficult in organizations.
The second driver of bureaucracy is authoritarianism. Authority is the ability to influence, create, and maintain oneness in an environment. It eliminates all sources of diversity and focusses on maximizing sameness. Authoritarianism is a trait that is manifested in some situations and not in others. Individuals are more likely to exhibit authoritarian behavior if they are brought into an environment that requires them to act. Bureaucracy is a form of authoritarianism.
One of the ways to prevent bureaucracy is promoting worker professionalism. Workers should not feel inadequate. Instead, they should be empowered to contribute to the realization of the organization goals. While bureaucracy is a problem that affects many organizations, it is a problem that has effective protective measures.
Analysis of Five Policy Cases in the Field of Energy Policy
Corporations are adopting renewable energy in pursuit of policies that will ascertain environmental protection. The article covers some case studies documenting the implementation of specific policies and their effectiveness in sustainability initiatives. According to the authors, the 20th century had the highest rates of pollution across the globe (Bär et al., 2015). Some environmental policies have stemmed from the effects of massive pollution to reduce adverse implications. The authors begin with a theoretical approach to policy implementation and effectiveness. The article covers five case studies that offer insight into the development and application of successful eco-friendly strategies.
The authors argue that policy implementation is the ability to turn theory into practice. In this case, policymakers assess past, present, and any future policies regarding specific issues. This exercise enables them to determine the success or failure of any policies via the evaluation of the gap between formation and implementation (Janssen, Wimmer, & Deljoo, 2015). In the article, implementation ensures positive impacts and changes. Interestingly, implementation is possible in contemporary society because of the input from interest groups as well as knowledge development by the citizens. The people are capable of mobilizing others to advocate for change in various systems. Policy cycles ensure that implementation occurs successfully.
The five cases that the article assessed include the European Union’s policy package on climate change and renewables, German’s energy transition, KNOWBRIDGE, Kosice Self-governing Region’s (KSRs) strategy, and the management of domains related to energy in local authorities (Bär et al., 2015). Green energy production is a common theme in all the cases and possible to achieve through the application of renewable sources, such as water and wind. Nonetheless, dialogue regarding climate change is imperative because it will improve the state of the nation and organizations.