Max Weber: A Short Biography Essay

Being a man with great aspirations, Max Weber’s life was filled with complexities and complications. Therefore, it is worthy of one’s time to explore the reasons of his success, a revolutionary thinker of the 19th century whose theories still remained as the subjects of interest among academics of the new millennium. In this paper, we shall explore on his life, followed by what influenced and motivated Weber to achieve the milestone of his life: scientific management theories. Lastly, we shall critique on the relevance of his theories in modern management. Biography Born in Erfurt, Thuringia, on 21st April 1864, Max Weber was the eldest son of Max Weber Senior and Hellen Fallenstein Weber. Suffering from meningitis at the age of four, Max Weber adopted reading as his past time which developed his academic strength at a young age (Secher 1980). Max Weber studied at the University of Heidelberg in the year 1882, specializing in the subject of Law. However, his education was disrupted while volunteering for military training as an Officer. In 1884, he resumed his education and graduated in 1890 (Secher 1980). He took up an offer at Freiburg University as an Economic Professor in 1894, a year after his marriage with Marianne Schniger, the grand niece of Max Weber, Senior. Ironically, Weber was haunted by a long term psychiatric breakdown and withdrew from work during the peak of his career as in 1897(Gerth & Mill 1982). Although psychologically disturbed, Weber inherited a vast amount of wealth from his deceased father (Secher 1980). The monetary gains enabled Weber to recuperate from his conditions along with the time and space to develop one of his academic masterpiece, â€Å"The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism† in 1904, which contested on the relevance of capitalism in the absence of spiritual belief (Gerth & Mill 1982). Max Weber died of pneumonia in Munich, on 14 June, 1904. However, he kept the world in awe with the introduction of Bureaucracy. A term which was quoted from his work â€Å"Economy and Society† published by Marianne in 1922; which advocated logical and scientific research methodology known as ‘rationalisation’ (Casteel 2009). Bureaucracy was originated from his skeletal invention of a system of management hierarchy while institutionalising a series of hospitals during World War I, of which; in hope to remedy the inequality of hereditary su ccession and the abused of authority within the German empire (Gerth & Mill 1982). Influences: Political and Social Factors Hegelian philosophy had been the German paradigm for centuries, originated from Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel who advocated that Nations could only be prosperous when the state, the civil society and its citizens are managed with strong moral principles (Pippin, Hoffe & Walker 2004). Despite the grand notion, the Hegelian society became a system of corruption and abused, under the governance of the aristocrats. Defunct and degenerative, its relevance was threatened in the 19th century by the evolution of socialism. Unlike the Hegelian society, the mission of the modern socialism is to serve beyond self-interest, while promoting its non-affiliation between a society and its state; which resonated with the oppressed peasants and middle-classes of Germany (Steinmetz 1993). The problem was further intensified by the ruling of Kaiser William ll, whose political interests polarized from Bismarck’s political philosophy which has served as a political stabiliser in Germany (Burbank & Cooper 2010). During his reign, the Kaiser had developed his policies through public image and popular opinion of the Germans. Unfortunately, the approach proved to be unwise, given the autocratic nature of Kaiser William the II, policy making became a game of propaganda to glorify him along with the riddance of any negative publicity or criticism directed at the imperial family (Kohut 1991). Inspired by modern socialism and disappointed with the Kaiser’s and nobilities’ myopic view on politics, Max Weber began to question on the effectiveness of hereditary succession in political power versus meritocracy. In association with his first hand experienced on bureaucracy, Weber began to infuse it with the theory of Charismatic Leadership; where visionaries should be appointed as leaders and serve the nation, with an alteration to the original concept: that leaders should be elected based on merits and not chosen by birth (Wren & Bedian 2009). Economics Factors In the late 19th century, industralisation began to take flight across the western part of the world; however European industrialising nations failed to capture the economic advantages brought about by machinisation (More 2000). France was an exception who experienced spurring growth at the point of time in conjunction with the United State of America (USA). An economist by profession, Max Weber observed that the theory of capitalism and free competitions advocated by Adam Smith was the key for the two nations’ success (Gerth & Mill 1982). In 1904, Max Weber visited the USA on a mission to understand the true essence of capitalism, and noticed that Americans relied excessively on the convenience of technologies for profit generation; that moral ethics began to dissipate in the society (Gerth & Mill 1982). It was the fear of the dissipation which triggered Weber to theorise â€Å"The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism† to address the underlying moral hazards b rought about by technologies, in the absence of spiritual faith (Wren & Bedian 2009). Intellectual Factors John Calvin’s philosophy for Protestant reformation had been one of the rare ideologies which Max Weber adopted in his publications. The underlying reason for Weber to adopt Calvinism; which promotes economic growth and the specialization of labour under the context of the Protestant teachings (Wren & Bedian 2009), was associated with Max Weber’s mother, Hellen Fallenstein Weber. Being a strong proponent on humanitarian issues and the faith of a Protestant, Hellen had been the mentor of Weber in issues related to liberalism and spirituality (Gerth & Mills 1982). Hence, Weber’s choice of religious philosophy and his publication of â€Å"The Protestant Ethics and the Spirit of Capitalism† can be seen as a form of tribute to Hellen, in recognition for the undying care and love for her eldest son. Any educated German of the 19th Century would have read the two most important works of the century: â€Å"Communist Manifesto† and â€Å"Capital† writ ten by Karl Marx. In summary, what Karl Marx was trying to advocate is the forsaking of self-interest among entrepreneurs and workers in their quest for monetary profits, instead both parties should collaborate as a collective unit in achieving communal benefits where a man’s gain will not be another man’s loss (Patterson 2009). During the period where destitute and suffering prevails, the Utopian theory of Marxism were alluring to the masses; including Weber. However, given his critical nature, Weber discovered the fundamental flaws of generalisation in Marxist’s theories; the absence of actual steps to achieve the desired outcome. With the intention to prove the functionality of Karl Marx’s theory, Weber began to formulate concrete steps to identify individuals’ motivations at work and suggestions on how to improve the societal well being (ed. Wiley 1987) which are reflected on his publication of â€Å"Economy and Society† Relevance to Management Today In the 21st century, bureaucracy has become the corporate culture of large organisations. The system has been a darling in the business arena due to the ease of its implementation, which readily provides a hierarchical framework for governance. Albeit its popularity, formal communication has always been a problem associated with bureaucracy (Wallace 1998). According to Welch (2005, p. 115), ‘hierarchies tend to make little generals out of perfectly normal people who find themselves in organisations that respond only to rank’. However, the underlying problem of bureaucracy is never with the theory itself, but rather the failure of modern managers to rationalise that the system are built upon human relationship. In order to resolve the existing problem, one have to understand that business management is not solely about delegating task and supervision of the employees under a stipulated framework. Instead, success is greatly dependent on ‘who manages and motivates’ the employees (Drucker 2006, p. 56). With reference to Drucker (2006, p. 60), ‘Employees may be our greatest liability, but people are our greatest opportunity.’ The ideology was well adopted by Anita and Gordon Roddick of â€Å"The Body Shop†, who had successfully unleashed the potential of their workers; with the creation of a strong sense of belonging and camaraderie; resulted from the company strong mission and values which focuses on human relations (Tomer 1999). Therefore, one could contest that the success of a manager, are associated with his or her foresight to set visions and missions. Followed by the ability to garner support from the worker and lastly to motivated them in achieving the objectives. In relation to Max Weber’s theory, the idea is what we known as charismatic leadership. Although charismatic leadership has been the ideal form of management style, researchers of organisational behaviours have noticed that it may not be the best approach for adoption. The reason for such an argument is that charismatic leaders are rare gems within the labour market. In order to resolve the issue, a modified version of charismatic leadership known as transformational leadership was introduced as the new frontier. Unlike charismatic leadership, transformational leadership is a set theory which focuses on how different leaders lead and inspire (Mcshane and Travagoline 2007), which are widely used to developed business leaders of tomorrow. Conclusion In retrospect, Max Weber’s penetrative ability to analyse human behaviours, is the reason for his theories to remain highly relevant and widely adopted by modern managers of today. However, as discussed earlier, the theories must not be seen as separate and independent entity. Instead, managers must first understand the nature of Weber’s theories in relation to their respective organisations. Followed by the need to anticipate and rationalise the possible problems that might arise from the application. Only then, may the managers tailor a set of solutions in accordance to the existing need and requirements of the organisations. Reference List Burbank, J & Cooper, F 2010, Empires in World History: Power and the Politics of Difference, Princeton University Press, New Jersey. Casteel, P.D 2009, ‘Weber and rationalization’, Research Starters Sociology, pp. 1-5. Drucker, PF 2006, Classic Drucker, Harvard Business School Publishing Corporation, Massachusetts. Gerth, HH & Mills, CW 1982, From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology, Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd, Padstow, Cornwall Kohut, TA 1991, Wilhelm II and the Germans: A Study in Leadership, Oxford University Press, New York, viewed on 10 February 2011, Marx, K 1970, German Ideology, The Electric Book Company Ltd, London, viewed 9 February 2011, McShane, S & Travagoline, T 2007, Organisational Behaviour on the Pacific Rim, McGraw Hill Australia Pty