CONCEPTIONS ABOUT BUREAUCRACY: THE DICOTOMY OF WEBER'S THEORY AND LIPSKY
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12662/2359-618xregea.v12i3.p175-183.2023Keywords:
bureaucracy, Max Weber, Michael Lipsky, dichotomyAbstract
This essay aims to discuss the theoretical differences between Max Weber's and Michael Lipsky's conceptions of bureaucracy. The argumentative construction consisted of presenting the two theories, initially highlighting the conception of both authors, who, in different ways, contributed to the creation of bureaucratic theory and have strong influences on studies in the area. Thus, after elucidating important research concepts, contextualizing and aligning the object of study, and discussing the theories, it was concluded that there are several dichotomies between them. The main result is the identification of the dichotomies presented in categories, namely: scope of the study area, metaphors, type of system, behavior of bureaucrats, hierarchy, discretion, norms, and analysis. The construction of the categories was carried out based on the reading of the bureaucratic theories of the two authors and the identification of the dichotomous structure. The study seeks to contribute to the production of knowledge in the field of Applied Social Sciences, presenting the contradictions of two theories of great relevance in studies on bureaucracy.
Downloads
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
AGREEMENT FOR THE CESSION OF AUTHOR’S RIGHTS
Through the present instrument, on the one hand, CENTRO UNIVERSITÁRIO CHRISTUS – UNICHRISTUS, henceforth referred to only as UNICHRISTUS, and, on the other,
1) Name _________________________________, ID number _______________________________,
2) Name _________________________________,ID number _______________________________,
3) Name _________________________________,ID number _______________________________,
4) Name _________________________________,ID number _______________________________,
5) Name _________________________________,ID number _______________________________,
henceforth referred to only as AUTHOR of the academic article whose title is ______________________________________, agree, in the best legal form, what follows:
ARTICLE FIRST – ON THE CESSION
The AUTHOR, their heirs and successors, in the terms of art. 49 of Law 9.610/98, cede the WORK for reproduction, publicizing, distribution, printing and publication by UNICHRISTUS, in any form or mean that exists or may come to exist.
Paragraph One. The aforementioned cession is non-exclusive and gratuitous, encompassing the totality of the WORK.
Paragraph Two. UNICHRISTUS may make the WORK available, in part or in total, for academic purposes, and is prohibited from altering its content, except for formal corrections that may be necessary.
Paragraph Three. The cession is valid in all countries, for versions in Portuguese or any translations to other languages, as UNICHRISTUS sees fit.
Paragraph Four. The original manuscript shall be delivered in the form indicated by UNICHRISTUS.
ARTICLE TWO – ON THE RESPONSIBILITIES
The AUTHOR declares that the WORK is theirs and is previously unpublished and is responsible for its contents and form, citations, references and other elements that compose it, having delivered it, when signing the present document, with the necessary language and methodology revision. As such, any judicial or extrajudicial measures relating to the content are of their entire responsibility.
Paragraph One. The AUTHOR declares there is no tacit prohibition attached to the publicizing of the WORK, and that it is free of any onus or impediments before Brazilian law.
Paragraph Two. Any burden relating to eviction belongs to the AUTHOR, who will also be responsible for compensating UNICHRISTUS, in case it is harmed by any judicial or extrajudicial means relating to the content of the work.
Paragraph Three. In case the work has multiple authors, they will be responsible in solidarity, except when proven otherwise.
ARTICLE THREE – ON JUDICIAL REPRESENTATION
The AUTHOR hereby constitutes UNICHRISTUS as their representative, thus authorizing it to act judicially or extra judicially on their behalf in cases relating to attacks against the WORK, be it by illegal reproduction, fraudulent edition or any form that constitutes an assault to intellectual property.
ARTICLE FOUR – FORUM
The parties hereby elect the forum of Fortaleza, in the state of Ceará, and renounce all others, as advantageous as they may be.
And because they deem the current agreement to be fair and just, the parties sign the present document in two copies.
Fortaleza, Ceará, on this ___ day of __________, 20__.
1) __________________________________________
2) __________________________________________
3) __________________________________________
4) __________________________________________
5) __________________________________________
Representing Centro Universitário Christus – UNICHRISTUS:
__________________________________________
