organized differently, either with technicians who handle a whole set of job tasks in one place, or with small teams who work around customers who stay seated in one place, is but one simple confirmation that along- side the segmentation of tasks lies another way of thinking, another possibility, revealed only if we start with the customers themselves. It is worth noting that this alternative results in a change in the duties of a given job (the stylist is now involved in shampooing), or in new modes of cooperation between members of the organization (small teams work within one area of the salon).
The problem of cost is no different in micro-bureaucracies either. Here is another light-hearted example, which occurred in the United States.
A European customer leaves for California where he has been sent for six months. Shortly thereafter, he is joined by his wife and children. Just before returning to Europe, his wife decides to purchase a comforter (duvet), which in her view are of better quality in America than in the Old World. The two head for a small specialty shop advertised in a local newspaper to make a purchase. Upon entering, they are greeted with a smile by a young woman wearing a name badge. She introduces herself and asks what the couple might be looking for. The prospective buyers explain what they want, and, with the help of the very sincere and considerate employee, decide upon a particular brand and make.
Unfortunately, the duvet in question is out of stock, and so the sales- woman explains that they can have it delivered. Learning that the couple plan to leave the country in a short while, which becomes a deci- sive condition for delivery, she has them fill out three forms – one yellow, one green and one pink – which, according to the employee, will ensure timely delivery of the quilt. The customers and saleswoman say good- bye, everyone in a good mood and quite pleased with the transaction.
Yet the fateful day arrives and the delivery does not take place. The couple, a little concerned, hurry back to the store where they are received by a different young lady in precisely the same manner as the one before: a sign that the warm, friendly welcome is little more than standardized company protocol. The Europeans interrupt the welcome, stating that they have had a problem with a delivery, the very thought of which, in a country where lawsuits and lawyers reign supreme, could pose a serious threat. After hearing the customers out, the employee regains her smile and almost childishly suggests that they must have made a mistake in filling out the delivery papers. Upon presentation, these papers turn out to be in perfect order, which enables the sales- woman, increasingly relieved, to again declare that there is no problem.
The customers, on the other hand, increasingly worried, respond that
A Requiem for Bureaucracy 63 there is a very serious problem indeed since they have not received the order and are leaving the country the very next day. The saleswoman explains that as far as she is concerned everything is in order, and, of course, the situation is all the less resolved.
What can be gleaned from the preceding sketch? The employee’s responsibility clearly ends with the sales order, and, so long as every- thing has been taken care of in that respect, everything having been done according to the specific procedures governing her functions, there is indeed no problem. Of course in this case the term “problem”
does not apply to the customer, but to the organization; and, insofar as each task is distinct from any other, and since no one cooperates nor has in the short run any common interests with anyone else, it applies to the employee herself, who can relax, since she is free from the worry of being penalized. Even if the rules and procedures which she uses lead to disastrous consequences for customers – and thus to the loss of their business – she is herself covered by this set of procedures, which, as in any bureaucracy, safeguard her more than they secure a positive outcome for the customers. The saleswoman is therefore not responsible for the end result which is a problem only for the customers. Once again, they have been “divided up” by the mini-bureaucracy between the ordering process and delivery, and it is their job to integrate these two distinct parts of the organization. In the end, they will succeed, of course, but just like the automotive suppliers we saw in an earlier example, they will make the organization pay: afraid of a possible legal battle, the com- pany agrees to ship the item to Europe by express mail, an arrangement which costs the small company almost as much as the original quilt.
The shop’s loss is twofold: on top of the direct cost which is now almost double and which one way or another winds up increasing the cost of other merchandise, there is the cost of lost business.
Small bureaucracies therefore operate just like large bureaucracies, be they public, industrial or service producers: they are organized around a succession of tasks (here product orders and delivery) and not around the customer. They seek to govern their relationships with the latter through company regulations and a friendly smile rather than through cooperation. The end result is that costs rise, as shown in the preceding example. What is more, these practices wind up “protecting” members of the bureaucracy, watering down their responsibilities, and no form of management control can resolve the situation. In the end, they “dissat- isfy” their customers, who, if they had a choice, would seek an organi- zation built around them, an organization that would go beyond simple individual service, which is increasingly taken for granted anyway. Once
again, even within small organizations, which are often thought to be adaptable and flexible, the determining factor is the mode of function- ing: small is not necessarily beautiful in the land of the bureaucrats.7