In Weberian Theory of Rationalization and McDonaldization of Contemporary Society, George Ritzer examines four types of rationality (practical, theoretical, substantive, and formal) and five dimensions of formal rationality. Ritzer’s main vehicle for Weberian theory is the concept of McDonaldization, which he says is the modern day equivalent of Weber’s concept of bureaucracy. Through Ritzer’s application, however, we find that Weber’s rationalization system does not strictly apply to bureaucratic or fast governments; it can also be applied to many other institutions in society. This paper looks at the application of Weberian theory to today’s college or university setting; more specifically, Virginia State University.
Before applying Weber’s five dimensions of formal rationality to the organization of the university, it will be useful to define Weber’s four types of rationality and Weber’s notion of the “iron cage of rationality.”
The first of Weber’s four types of rationality is practical rationality. Practical rationality “is found in mundane, contemporary activities and reflects their mundane interests.” (Ritzer, 39) According to Weber, it is “the methodical pursuit of a definite and practical end by means of an increasingly accurate calculation of the appropriate means”. use to complete daily routines and tasks. It allows them to choose methodically from a variety of preconceived ways to achieve a particular goal. Practical rationality allows us to do mundane tasks in smaller pieces so that we can get through the day.
Another type of rationality – theoretical rationality – is slightly different. While practical rationality looks at the actor to take a specific action, theoretical rationality is a cognitive process. which “involves logical deduction, the attribution of causality, the arrangement of symbols.” Theoretical rationality is abstract and deductive and “is derived from the innate need of actors to give logical meaning to a world that appears random.” (Ritzer, 39) Practical rationality enables everyone to act around them, but speculative rationality enables them to know and understand the people around them.
Substantive rationality, the third of Weber’s types, can be seen as somewhat of an amalgamation of practical and theoretical rationality, as “Substantial rationality entails the choice of means to ends that are directed by some greater system of human values“. (Ritzer, 39) Substantial rationality is similar to practical rationality, which involves choosing a means to an end and acting on that decision, however, the judgment of the just, which is to act on the means, is more speculative in nature, because it involves concept and understanding. some account of goods. Substantive rationality is what enables people to make choices between what is right and what is wrong, based on a larger set of social values. It also allows individuals to determine which actions are socially acceptable and which are not.
Weber’s fourth type of reasoning is formal rationality. This type of rationality is very similar to substantive rationality; however, in formal rationality the choices of individuals are made according to “universally applied rules, regulations and laws” rather than the value of society. (Ritzer, 39) Formal rationality also differs from substantive rationality in that it suppresses individuals, gradually providing flexibility in what they can decide. As Ritzer asserts: “under formal rationality we are not left to our own thoughts, but we use existing rules, institutions and structures that either predetermine the best ways or help us find them.” (Ritzer, 39).
Formal rationality paved the way for institutional structures such as bureaucracy, which ultimately lead to what Weber called “the iron cage of rationality.” What Weber meant by this was that, while bureaucratic disciplines were intended to make everyone’s life easier, they became so entrenched and immovable and inflexible that individuals were captured and controlled by them. Weber was afraid that the “iron cage of rationality” would become so strong and prevail that “Society would become nothing but a seamless web of rationalist structures.” In order to better understand the ways in which formal rationality creates an iron cage, it will be useful to examine the five dimensions of formal rationality defined by Weber and elaborated by Ritzer.
The first of the five dimensions is efficiency. Clearly, efficiency is defined as the fastest route from one point to another. According to rationality, efficiency is “the choice of the best means to an end” (Ritzer, 44) and in a formally rational society or a McDonaldized society, this means that a given institution will try and make its processes as fast and labor-free. as much as possible. There are many ways in which we can see efficiency applied to Virginia Commonwealth University (VCU). For example, student registration for classes is almost exclusively done online, reducing the need for employees to come to the office for registration and handle registration on paper. We also see efficiency in the access and payment of tuition and fees efficiency in the automation of student records. At almost any time of the day, a student can act as a file clerk in the attached records and memos, accessing their transcripts, current semester order, transcripts and even a student ID card.
Calculability is the second aspect of formal rationality. It involves things that are calculated, numbered, and valued. Ritzer, 46) Calculability as such is primarily concerned with the quantity of the thing, rather than with its quality. In VCU we can see the calculability in the focus of the administration by the number of students in the school and the details of the enrollment. types. In general, the number of freshmen matriculating is seen as good; however, there is no account of the number of teachers available to teach classes, so that the number of students coming to school is always increasing. Yes, the number of people seeking an education at VCU matters, but the quality of education seems less important.
Predictability, the third dimension, consistency from one time and place to another. as Ritzer notes; “In a rational society people want to know what to expect in every setting at all times. They don’t want or expect surprises.” (Ritzer, 47) VCU provides predictability in the form of classes that are offered either every semester or every other semester, allowing students to plan far in advance when ordering for a course. We also see predictability in the greater possibility of variation. Once a student has chosen a specific major, that student can be reasonably assured that they will have only a few different majors for the rest of their online class registration. The online system that VCU uses has quite a few benefits; but there are many disadvantages. For example, when the system prevents students from enrolling in overlapping classes, it does not take into account any special dispensations that students may have from course instructors. Also, when the system detects the class as full, not paying attention to motivating and needing students who are already registered in the course or students who are taking the course they are trying to volunteer. This leads to situations where students who have a ‘filler’ course or just take it for school, prevent students from taking their classes from their elders. In these situations, human judgment can correct the problems, but formal reasoning is not allowed.
Notes:
Kivisto, P. (2005). Illuminating Social Life: Classical and Contemporary Theory Revisited. Sage Publications, Inc.
Wallace, R. A., Wolf, A. (2006). Contemporary Sociological Theory Expanding the Classical Tradition. Prentice Hall 6th Ed.
