The Nature, Conditions, and Development of Bureaucratic Herrschaft

The Specific Functions of the Modern Bureaucracy

The specific manner in which the modern bureaucracy [Beamtentum] operates is the following:
First, it is based on the general principle of precisely defined and organized across-the-board competencies of the various offices [Behörde]. These competencies are underpinned by rules, laws, or administrative regulations. That means:
1. A rigid division of labor is in place for the purpose of performing regular daily tasks as official duties in the functioning of the bureaucratically governed system.
2. In order to fulfill these duties the necessary chains of command are firmly established and divided up [among the Beamte], and their capacity to coerce (physical, sacred, or other) is firmly restricted by regulation.
3. Regular and continuous fulfillment of these assigned duties, and the execution of respective rights is systematically secured by hiring people with certified qualifications.
These three aspects constitute the essence of bureaucratic administration of a Behörde in the public sector. In the private sector, these three aspects constitute the essence of a bureaucratic management of a private company [Betrieb]. Not until the emergence of the modern state could this type of bureaucratic government Behörde be fully realized in political and church organizations. And it was not until the development of the most advanced forms of capitalism that this kind of administration emerged in the private sector.
Historically speaking, a Behörde, with fixed competencies to function continuously, was not the rule but the exception, even in such elaborate and extensive political systems as those of the ancient Orient. The same holds true for the expansive Germanic and Mongolian empires, as well as for many feudal states. In these older systems, the Ruler undertakes the most important measures using personal confidantes, table companions, or servants as proxies. [Contrary to the Beamte of a bureaucratic Behörde], the Ruler’s proxies receive temporary assignments, and authority is created on a case-by-case basis and not strictly defined.
Second, the principles of “hierarchy of offices” and “proper channels” exists. This means that there is a strictly organized system of super- and subordination of government Behörde with levels of authority, where the higher ones supervise the lower ones. This system also allows the ruled people to appeal from a lower Behörde to its superordinate, a process that is strictly regulated through proper channels. When it is fully developed, this hierarchy of offices is organized in a manner in which there is one final authority (e.g., a monocracy).
The principle of hierarchically ordered “proper channels” is found in public and churchly administrations, as well as in any other bureaucratic entity (i.e., in big political parties or in large private companies whether or not one wants to call the bureaucracy of private companies “Behörde”).¹ However, when fully applying the principle of competence, hierarchical subordination does not mean that the higher level has the power to assume the authority of the subordinated level—at least this is true for the public sector. The opposite is in fact the rule, and therefore, when the tasks of a [subordinated] Amt are completed the office still must be filled again. This rule may not be broken.
Third, modern administration is based on two things. First, on documents that are preserved as original copies or as concepts, and second, on a staff of subordinated Beamte and writers of all kind. Beamte working in the Behörde, together with relevant resources including material goods and documents constitute a bureau [Büro]. In the private sector, this is often called a “Counting House” [Kontor]. In a modern organization of a Behörde, the office is, as a matter of principle, separated from the private living quarters of the staff. Altogether, the modern bureaucratic organization separates the duties and interests of the official position from the private sphere of life. It also strictly separates public funds and public means from the private property of the Beamte.
But everywhere this status is a product of a long development.
Today, this system is found in the administration of public organizations and administration of private companies. In the private sector, it also applies to the head of the company. The accounts of the counting house and private household, the correspondence of the business and private spheres, and business and personal assets are separated from each other as a matter of principle. The more the modern business practices are established, the more strictly they are separated. Indeed, the beginning of this development was already found in The Middle Ages. Also, the head of a company can be characterized in the following way, but this is special in modern times. The head of the company acts as the “first Beamte” of his company, in the same way the ruler of a particular bureaucratic modern state has called himself the “first servant.”²
The idea that bureaucracy run by governments and bureaucracy run by private companies are inherently different is a continental European belief. This view, in contrast, is completely alien to Americans.
Fourth, the work as a Beamte typically requires an in-depth specialist training to undertake all specialized tasks of the Amt. This training renders the position specifically modern. Increasingly, this also applies to modern directors and the employees of private companies, as well as to the public Beamte.
Fifth, a full-fledged Amt occupies all the professional energy of the Beamte to process its tasks, regardless of the fact that his mandatory working hours in the office can be strictly limited. Again, this is usually a product of a long development in both public Amt and private Amt. In contrast, in the past it was common for Beamte to work part-time.
Sixth, the duties of the Amt undertaken by the Beamte are based on general learnable rules and regulations, which are more or less firm and more or less comprehensive. The knowledge of these rules and regulations thus constitutes a special kind of “applied science”³ (e.g., jurisprudence, the administration sciences, and the accounting sciences), which the Beamte possesses.
The modern conduct of the Amt is bound by rules and regulations. This binding is so much rooted in the character of the modern Amt that modern scientific theories describe the bureaucracy in the following, abstract way. These theories assume that a certain authority that was legally granted to a Behörde by decree, and only entitles it [the Behörde] to manage specific matters in an abstract sense, and not on a case-by-case basis. As we will see, this stands in stark contrast to how the administrative regulations in patrimonialism were administered. There, the administration of regulations and rules were based upon individual privilege, and the capacity to bestow acts of mercy, whenever the rules and regulations were not based on sacred traditions.

The Position of the Beamte

Everything we have discussed so far has the following consequences for both the inward (psychological) and the outward (material) standing of the Beamte.⁴