An organization achieves the common goal by planning and coordination that stand-alone entities are not able to achieve. Organizational advantages include easier achievement of targets, strength due to the amalgamation of talents and ability to extend itself beyond what is possible when solitary. The disadvantages would be that collective forward progress is slower and lack of personal creativity due to compliance with common ideals. Bureaucracy has been exhaustively discussed in organizational concepts. Ideally, bureaucracy is symbolized by authority relations, recruitment by competence, and fixed salaries. Max Weber described it as technically superior to all other forms of organization and hence indispensable to large, complex enterprises. Weber’s Principles of Bureaucracy proclaims the following of the principles of Divide labor into specialized expertise areas throughout the organization, Pyramid position defined by a hierarchy of authority and an explicit chain of command, Formal rules governing decisions and actions of everyone that allows continuity in event of personnel changes, Be detached with employees so that sentiments do not distort objective judgment and Select workers by their technical utility to rule out friendship or favoritism is ruled out, and advancement is by seniority and achievement. Rigid documentation is followed to keep tabs on progress and evaluate. However, bureaucratic organizations seem to stifle worker creativity since omnipresent rules and regulations create no room for innovation and improvisation by the workers. The inability to make quick decisions due to lack of authority also results in reduced productivity. This downside of bureaucracy especially in large organizations has made it questionable as to its rationality and efficiency. Its principles have also attached a connotation of disapproval to the terms bureaucratic and bureaucracy due to its incompetence and a lack of broad-mindedness. However, although it sounds improbable considering its successful image and culture today, GE was a struggling bureaucratic organization in the 1990s. Too many layers and no decision-making capabilities characterized it. The organization lagged behind in making timely strategic decisions. This success is attributed to what was essentially a single managerial decision made by Welch back in the mid-’90s. Jack Welch joined the General Electric Company (GE) in 1960. Welch started work as an engineer in the plastics division. However although his immediate work environment was fast-paced and exciting, he felt smothered by the bloated bureaucracy of the company. He could not function to his full ingenious limits, had to wait for management decisions on the smallest of tasks. He felt undervalued and was highly dissatisfied with the standard bonus he received. He found another job and almost quit but was persuaded to stay on by Reuben Cutoff, who saw his immense potential.