Calling all Knowledgable Saddonians....

[Howlin Mad Missy]

Weber and Maslow ring some bells but it's been some time since I read any of that stuff. I used to be smart
It's all down hill now

[donnydarkoIRL]

Weber and Maslow ring some bells but it's been some time since I read any of that stuff. I used to be smart
It's all down hill now

Thanks for replying Missy.

Maslow's got that hierarchy of needs, self actualisation and all that.

Not a cklue about the dude Weber yet.

It's a very broad project yet needs to be applied to my proffesion directly, tricky!

And I still think you're smart.

[Master]

It has been a long time since I did my Sociology degree ans Masters but I do know Weber is considered the founder of Sociology and inter-actionalism. Really generalising but he believed that the protestant ethic meant that they were more entrepenerial than Catholics who were more family orientated and not individualistic and thus why these countries were successful capitalists.

[brucelee]

Maximilian Carl Emil Weber (pronounced [maks veːbɛɐ]) (21 April 1864 – 14 June 1920) was a German political economist and sociologist who was considered one of the founders of the modern study of sociology and public administration. He began his career at the University of Berlin, and later worked at Freiburg, Heidelberg, Vienna and Munich. He was influential in contemporary German politics, being an advisor to Germany's negotiators at the Treaty of Versailles and to the commission charged with drafting the Weimar Constitution.
Weber's major works deal with rationalization in sociology of religion and government.[1] His most famous work is his essay The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, which began his work in the sociology of religion. In this work, Weber argued that religion was one of the non-exclusive reasons for the different ways the cultures of the Occident and the Orient have developed, and stressed importance of particular characteristics of ascetic Protestantism which led to the development of capitalism, bureaucracy and the rational-legal state in the West. In another major work, Politics as a Vocation, Weber defined the state as an entity which claims a monopoly on the legitimate use of physical force, a definition that became pivotal to the study of modern Western political science. His most known contributions are often referred to as the 'Weber Thesis'.






Hitman, I'll try to search them for you. Here's about Weber from Wikipedia. These things were part of my studies in organizational behavior.

[Mikkel_K]

A few things about Weber (no idea what you are aiming for):

His most famous work (as said otherwise) is The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. The basic notion of the book is that certain religions - protestantism - was beneficial to the development of capitalism. Ascribing (religious) value to the idea of hard work and considering earning individual money a symbol of God being favourable to you created a much better environment for the industrial revolution than the (then-prevailing) catholic idea of money being sinful and 'bad' for you (wherefore you should give them to the church). One major conclusion to draw from Weber's work here is that he basically goes against Marx' ideas of 'base' and 'superstruction' - it is not the economic reality that determines the ideas, but the ideas that help shape the economic reality. Actors determine the structure in other words.

Weber also did a lot of work on the concept of The State. Most famously perhaps seen in his statement that The State is defined by having the legimate use of force.

For your work - considering the other works you mention - it might be his works on 'bureaucracy' which are of particular interest. He basically invented (this was written 100 years ago) the notions of bureaucrats - efficient, non-partial, adhering to the rule of law etc. working in the public administration. 'Rationality' is a key concept in this regard. Admittedly there was a pessimistic, almost Orwellian side to Weber in this also, as he thought mankind would get lost in an 'Iron Cage of Rationality'.

To continue where Brucelee left of and quote Wikipedia for you:

"Weber is also well-known for his critical study of the bureaucratisation of society, the rational ways in which formal social organizations apply the ideal type characteristics of a bureaucracy. It was Weber who began the studies of bureaucracy and whose works led to the popularization of this term.[46] Many aspects of modern public administration go back to him, and a classic, hierarchically organised civil service of the Continental type is called "Weberian civil service", although this is only one ideal type of public administration and government described in his magnum opus Economy and Society (1922), and one that he did not particularly like himself – he only thought it particularly efficient and successful. In this work, Weber outlines a description, which has become famous, of rationalization (of which bureaucratization is a part) as a shift from a value-oriented organisation and action (traditional authority and charismatic authority) to a goal-oriented organization and action (legal-rational authority). The result, according to Weber, is a "polar night of icy darkness", in which increasing rationalization of human life traps individuals in an "iron cage" of rule-based, rational control.[47] Weber's bureaucracy studies also led him to his analysis – correct, as it would turn out, after Stalin's takeover – that socialism in Russia would lead to over-bureaucratization rather than to the "withering away of the state" (as Karl Marx had predicted would happen in communist society).[48]"

[donnydarkoIRL]

Cool guys thanks, I'll rep you guys In a bit!

[brucelee]

Leading
An organization has the greatest chance of being successful when all of the employees work toward achieving its goals. Since leadership involves the exercise of influence by one person over others, the quality of leadership exhibited by supervisors is a critical determinant of organizational success. Thus, supervisors study leadership in order to influence the actions of employees toward the achievement of the goals of the organization.
Supervisors can learn about leadership through research. Leadership studies can be classified as trait, behavioral, contingency, and transformational. Earliest theories assumed that the primary source of leadership effectiveness lay in the personal traits of the leaders themselves. Yet, traits alone cannot explain leadership effectiveness. Thus, later research focused on what the leader actually did when dealing with employees. These behavioral theories of leadership sought to explain the relationship between what the leader did and how the employees reacted, both emotionally and behaviorally. Yet, behavior can't always account for leadership in different situations. Thus, contingency theories of leadership studied leadership style in different environments. Transactional leaders, such as those identified in contingency theories, clarify role and task requirements for employees. Yet, contingency can't account for the inspiration and innovation that leaders need to compete in today's global marketplace. Newer transformational leadership studies have shown that leaders, who are charismatic and visionary, can inspire followers to transcend their own self-interest for the good of the organization.
A Definition of Leadership
A traditional definition of leadership: Leadership is an interpersonal influence directed toward the achievement of a goal or goals.
Three important parts of this definition are the terms interpersonal, influence, and goal.
· Interpersonal means between persons. Thus, a leader has more than one person (group) to lead.
· Influence is the power to affect others.
· Goal is the end one strives to attain.
Basically, this traditional definition of leadership says that a leader influences more than one person toward a goal.
The definition of leadership used in this course follows.
LEADERSHIP is a dynamic relationship based on mutual influence and common purpose between leaders and collaborators in which both are moved to higher levels of motivation and moral development as they affect real, intended change. (Kevin Freiberg and Jackie Freiberg, NUTS! Southwest Airlines' Crazy Recipe for Business and Personal Success, Bard Press, 1996, p. 29
Three important parts of this definition are the terms relationship, mutual, and collaborators. Relationship is the connection between people. Mutual means shared in common. Collaborators cooperate or work together.
This definition of leadership says that the leader is influenced by the collaborators while they work together to achieve an important goal.
Leadership versus Management
A leader can be a manager, but a manager is not necessarily a leader. The leader of the work group may emerge informally as the choice of the group. If a manager is able to influence people to achieve the goals of the organization, without using his or her formal authority to do so, then the manager is demonstrating leadership.
According to John P. Kotter in his book, A Force for Change: How Leadership Differs From Management (The Free Press, 1990), managers must know how to lead as well as manage. Without leading as well as managing, today's organizations face the threat of extinction. Management is the process of setting and achieving the goals of the organization through the functions of management: planning, organizing, directing (or leading), and controlling. A manager is hired by the organization and is given formal authority to direct the activity of others in fulfilling organization goals. Thus, leading is a major part of a manager's job. Yet a manager must also plan, organize, and control. Generally speaking, leadership deals with the interpersonal aspects of a manager's job, whereas planning, organizing, and controlling deal with the administrative aspects. Leadership deals with change, inspiration, motivation, and influence. Management deals more with carrying out the organization's goals and maintaining equilibrium.
The key point in differentiating between leadership and management is the idea that employees willingly follow leaders because they want to, not because they have to. Leaders may not possess the formal power to reward or sanction performance. However, employees give the leader power by complying with what he or she requests. On the other hand, managers may have to rely on formal authority to get employees to accomplish goals.