The Algocracy as a new ideal type for government organizations: Predictive policing in Berlin as an empirical case

Motivated by the classic work of Max Weber, this study develops an ideal type to study the transformation of government bureaucracy in the ‘age of algorithms’. We present the new ideal type – the algocracy – and position this vis-à-vis three other ideal types (machine bureaucracy, professional bureaucracy, infocracy). We show that while the infocracy uses technology to improve the machine bureaucracy, the algocracy automates the professional bureaucracy. By reducing and quantifying the uncertainty of decision-making processes in organizations the algocracy rationalizes the exercise of rational-legal authority in the professional bureaucracy. To test the value of the ideal type, we use it to analyze the introduction of a predictive policing system in the Berlin Police. Our empirical analysis confirms the value of the algocracy as a lens to study empirical practices: the study highlights how the KrimPro system conditions professional assessments and centralizes control over complex police processes. This research therefore positions the algocracy in the heart of discussions about the future of the public sector and presents an agenda for further research.

A Proposal on Developing a 360° Agile Organizational Structure by Superimposing Matrix Organizational Structure with Cross-functional Teams

With the growing business opportunities and expanding boundaries, the organizational structure of the companies is becoming highly dynamic with several levels flattened out and branching out horizontally, instead of being vertical. With agility required in all fast-evolving organizations, it is essential to check out for the suitability of the modern organizational structures prevalent, being classified by Mintzberg as ‘entrepreneurial or simple structure, machine bureaucracy, professional bureaucracy, divisional form, and adhocracy or innovative’ (Mintzberg, 1980; Lunenburg, 2012). In this article, we propose a 360° Agile organizational structure which is a hybrid of the matrix organizational structure superimposed with cross-functional teams (CFTs). This article discusses the possibilities of forming smaller teams without compromising the incidence of the essential ‘skills– talents–competencies’, necessary for every single project, thereby superimposing the matrix organizational structure and the CFTs. This article also discusses the advantages and disadvantages of this proposed organizational structure. A possible cross-check with regard to the scalability issues has also been made with the Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe®) agile HR practices.

From “manager” to “strategist”

Purpose Few high-growth firms (HGFs) are able to maintain high-growth over time. The purpose of this paper is to find out why only a small number of firms become persistent HGFs, explicitly focusing on the role of the founding entrepreneur in this process. Design/methodology/approach Initially, 28 semi-structured interviews were performed with high-growth entrepreneurs to discover why so few founders could become persistent high-growth entrepreneurs. In a second phase, four case studies were conducted to uncover the factors that facilitate a swift evolution from the “managerial” role to the “strategic” role. Findings High-growth entrepreneurs, who quickly make a transition from a managerial role into a strategic role are more likely to keep their firm on its high-growth trajectory. This transition is made possible by: the early development of strategic skills; the presence of a high quality human capital base; and an organizational structure with characteristics from Mintzberg’s “machine bureaucracy.” Practical implications The results are vital for entrepreneurs of “one-shot” HGFs with the ambition to make their firm a “persistent” HGF. If high-growth rates are to be sustained, the three factors that emerged from the authors’ analysis should foster the delegation of managerial tasks, resulting in an easier transition toward a “strategic role.” Originality/value Insights are valuable as both founders and governmental institutions can benefit from knowing which factors contribute to a successful phase transition from “manager” to “strategist.”

In search of relevance: conventional or critical management inquiry?

PurposeThis article provides a critical appraisal of the relevance of conventional management inquiry to management, and a proposal to use the critical management paradigm to develop genuinely relevant management studies.Design/methodology/approachDiscusses the relevance of conventional management inquiry to management.FindingsConventional management inquiry closely mirrors scientific inquiry, with strict adherence to scientific method in pursuit of “objective” and rigorous empirical evidence or “proof” of specific and universal managerial truths. The products of this research are published via a machine bureaucracy that reinforces the hegemony of science. However, some academics have expressed concern that there is little uptake in commerce of “new” management ideas, and that practising managers have little or no interest in academic research. Based on 20 years experience of commerce and academe the author explores the underlying reasons for the failure of management academe to be taken seriously by managers.Research limitations/implicationsThe article proposes the need for a more applied and critical direction to management research. Some ideas for research are presented at the end of the piece, but the main message is that all management research should be more timely and relevant to practitioners' issues in the daily task of management.Practical implicationsThe article is a commentary on the principles on which management should be studied (and to a lesser degree on how these studies should be published). As such it is difficult to suggest any implications for management practitioners. That said the author would advise management practitioners involved in the funding of research to question the relevance of research themes and conventional responses to them. There guidelines drawn for academic practitioners.Originality/valueSimilar ideas on “relevance lost” have been presented previously. However, the arguments have been lost in an academic hegemony that reinforces the requirements for a strictly scientific approach to the study of management. The original proposition of this article is one of the outliers of this approach, critical management theory, should take centre stage in ensuring relevance.

Organizational Power and Conflict regarding the Hospital—Physician Relationship: Symbolic or Substantive?

The purpose of this paper is to provide a critical review of organizational power and conflict regarding the hospital—physician relationship. The issue of power being symbolic and/or substantive is discussed. The classification (Mintzberg Model) of organizations as simple structures, machine bureaucracies, professional bureaucracies, divisionalized forms and adhocracies are reviewed. Also, the issue of whether the perceived autonomy that professional employees enjoy increases the likelihood that an executive level manager in a professional bureaucracy (hospital entity) will devote substantial attention to influencing symbolic outcomes as opposed to substantive outcomes in a machine bureaucracy is discussed. In conclusion, conflicts between hospitals and physicians can be resolved in two ways: (1) by avoiding controversial decisions that might threaten the powers and prerogatives of professional groups; and (2) by agreeing to decisions that hold something for everyone involved in the hospital—physician power relationship.