Beach Nuts was an extremely influential company in the food industry. It was well known f its production of children juice that was termed as healthy for children consumption. The company had had exclusive market share in the United States as well as the rest of the world. This was mainly following its uniquely manufactured juice that was fit for children consumption. However, the adulterous production behavior of the company did not last for long. It became known that the juice that the company produced was negatively influential to the body of its users. The juice was believed to be a possible cause of extremely negative effects among children. However, the actions that followed the realization that the juice company was producing harmful products may be analyzed on exclusive consideration of bureaucracy and authority theories.
It would be wise to understand that organizations are led by execution of authority. This means that certain people must understand that there exists exclusive rules that must be respected. For example, the managers of an organization are answerable to the owner or the director of a company. This means that certain rules have to be borrowed for certain goals in the organization to be achieved. This is the same case with the production of Beach Nuts. The production of adulterated apple juice for children was as a result of authority that was being executed through Hoyvald. He was in charge of marketing and h had to be respectful of the protocols of principles that he found taking place in the company (Traub, 1988). This was in support to the authority theory by Chester Bernard.
In support of the same theory, Licari who seemed as the investigator to the company showed some elements of respect for authority. He had recognized his duty as a an exercise of authority by the prosecution body as he was required to reveal the truth about the practices that the company engaged in during its production process of the juice. He confesses to respect and being honest to his new boss who was the leader of the Beach Nuts Company. He exercised authority as per the duty that was given to him to challenge Hoyvald by giving a report that indicated the reality of the activities Beach Nuts Company carried out (Traub, 1988).
On the other hand, Weber’s theory of authority and bureaucracy would be useful in defining the stand for different individuals in the Beach Nut case. Like any other company, Beach Nuts was divided into departments which form different leadership positions in the organization. Hoyvald who had been the marketing manager of Beach Nuts Company for sometime could not have been allowed to execute any change to the products that he was supposed to sell. He had been assigned the duty of taking the products as they were and sell them (Traub, 1988). He had to respect the role of his department without questioning.
LiCari who was in charge of investigations on the activities of the company, was also in respect of authority and bureaucracy. Bureaucracy ascribes duty of authority to individuals. LiCari had to ensure that the duty that he carried out of trying to identify whether Lavery was competent and whether he could be significant in the productivity of the organization had been assigned to him through bureaucracy and he had to execute his duties on the basis of the authority that could have been given to him (Traub, 1988).
Therefore, it would be possible to conclude that bureaucracy and authority are inseparable. They are the major forces that govern organizations. Existence of bureaucratic authority defines the success of operations of an organization.
Traub, J. (1988, July 24). Into the Mouths of Babes . The New York Times, pp. 10-32.